Obama LIES - Here's the TRUTH about America's economy

OBAMA LIES - HERE'S THE TRUTH ABOUT AMERICA'S ECONOMY

 

Economic Recovery? 13 Of The Biggest Retailers In America Are Closing Down Stores

26th February 2016 in Economy

Michael Snyder via The Economic Collapse blog,


Barack Obama recently stated that anyone that is claiming that America’s economy is in decline is “peddling fiction“.

Well, if the economy is in such great shape, why are major retailers shutting down hundreds of stores all over the country?

Last month, I wrote about the “retail apocalypse” that is sweeping the nation, but since then it has gotten even worse.  Closing stores has become the “hot new trend” in the retail world, and “space available” signs are going up in mall windows all over the United States.

Barack Obama can continue huffing and puffing about how well the middle class is doing all he wants, but the truth is that the cold, hard numbers that retailers are reporting tell an entirely different story.

Earlier today, Sears Chairman Eddie Lampert released a letter to shareholders that was filled with all kinds of bad news.  In this letter, he blamed the horrible results that Sears has been experiencing lately on “tectonic shifts” in consumer spending…

In a letter to shareholders on Thursday, Lampert said the impact of “tectonic shifts” in consumer spending has spread more broadly in the last year to retailers “that had previously proven to be relatively immune to such shifts."

“Walmart, Nordstrom, Macy’s, Staples, Whole Foods and many others have felt the impact of disruptive changes from online competition and new business models,” Lampert wrote.

And it is very true – Sears is doing horribly, but they are far from alone.  The following are 13 major retailers that are closing down stores.....

#1 Sears lost 580 million dollars in the fourth quarter of 2015 alone, and they are scheduled to close at least 50 more “unprofitable stores” by the end of this year

#2 It is being reported that Sports Authority will file for bankruptcy in March.  Some news reports have indicated that around 200 stores may close, but at this point it is not known how many of their 450 stores will be able to stay open

#3 For decades, Kohl’s has been growing aggressively, but now it plans to shutter 18 stores in 2016

#4 Target has just finished closing 13 stores in the United States

#5 Best Buy closed 30 stores last year, and it says that more store closings are likely in the months to come

#6 Office Depot plans to close a total of 400 stores by the end of 2016

The next seven examples come from one of my previous articles

#7 Wal-Mart is closing 269 stores, including 154 inside the United States

#8 K-Mart is closing down more than two dozen stores over the next several months

#9 J.C. Penney will be permanently shutting down 47 more stores after closing a total of 40 stores in 2015

#10 Macy’s has decided that it needs to shutter 36 stores and lay off approximately 2,500 employees 

#11 The Gap is in the process of closing 175 stores in North America

#12 Aeropostale is in the process of closing 84 stores all across America

#13 Finish Line has announced that 150 stores will be shutting down over the next few years.

These store closings can be particularly cruel for small towns.  Just consider the impact that Wal-Mart has had on the little town of Oriental, North Carolina…

The Town’n Country grocery in Oriental, North Carolina, a local fixture for 44 years, closed its doors in October after a Wal-Mart store opened for business. Now, three months later — and less than two years after Wal-Mart arrived — the retail giant is pulling up stakes, leaving the community with no grocery store and no pharmacy.

Though mom-and-pop stores have steadily disappeared across the American landscape over the past three decades as the mega chain methodically expanded, there was at least always a Wal-Mart left behind to replace them. Now the Wal-Marts are disappearing, too.

Of course there are many factors involved in this ongoing retail apocalypse.  Competition from online retailers is becoming more intense, and consumer spending patterns are rapidly changing.

But in the end, the truth is that you can’t get blood out of a rock.  The middle class in America is shrinking, and there just isn’t as much discretionary spending going on as there used to be.

And now that we have entered a new economic downturn, many retailers are finding that there are some local communities that can no longer support their stores.  The following comes from CNBC…

Though the shift to online shopping is no doubt playing a role in lighter foot traffic at malls, there’s more to their changing economics than the rise of Amazon. Changing demographics in a town are another reason a shopping center could struggle or fail — for example, if massive layoffs in a particular industry cause people to move away to find employment.

“A lot of people want to try and tie it to the Internet or ‘that’s not cool,’ or teens don’t like it,” Jesse Tron, a spokesman for industry trade group International Council of Shopping Centers, told CNBC last year. “It’s hard to support large-format retail in those suburban areas when people are trying to just pay their mortgage.”

In order to have a thriving middle class, we need good paying middle class jobs.  Unfortunately, our economy has been bleeding those kinds of jobs quite rapidly.  For example, Halliburton just announced that it is eliminating 5,000 more jobs after getting rid of 4,000 workers at the end of last year.

During the Obama years, good paying middle class jobs have been getting replaced by low paying service jobs.  At this point, 51 percent of all American workers make less than $30,000 a year.

And there is no way that you can support a middle class family with children on $30,000 a year.

We have an economy that is in the process of failing.  We can see it in the explosion of subprime auto loans that are going bad, we can see it in the hundreds of retail stores that are shutting down, and we can see it in the tens of thousands of good paying energy jobs that are being lost.

During the Obama years, interest rates have been pushed to the floor, the 'Federal Reserve' has created trillions of dollars out of thin air, and the size of our national debt is getting close to doubling.  Despite all of those desperate measures, our economy continues to crumble.

We stole from the future to try to paper over our failures and it didn’t work.  Now an economic downturn that will ultimately turn out to be even worse than the “Great Recession” of 2008 and 2009 has begun, and our 'leaders' have absolutely no idea how to fix things.

I wish I had better news to report, but I don’t.  Get prepared now, because very rough times are ahead.

http://www.theburningplatform.com/2016/02/26/economic-recovery-13-of-the-biggest-retailers-in-america-are-closing-down-stores/
 

Mysterious humming sound detected

Mysterious humming sound detected in the dark reaches of the ocean

What could be making the deep ocean hum?

 

Who or what is making the sound remains a mystery, but it may be a 'dinner bell' signaling feeding time for deep sea creatures.

Bryan Nelson
February 25, 2016, 8:14 a.m.

The deep sea is a forbidding place, inhabited by strange, monstrous creatures that haunt its pitch-black waters. Now researchers have discovered an eerie new attribute of this little-known region: a subtle low humming sound that emanates from its depths every day around dawn and dusk.

“It’s not that loud, it sounds like a buzzing or humming, and that goes on for an hour to two hours, depending on the day,” said Simone Baumann-Pickering, co-author of the study, in a statement.

The source of the hum remains a mystery, to say the least. Researchers suspect that it may be coming from an organism, or perhaps many organisms chanting in unison, but no known marine creature could be matched to the noise. It might be coming from a species yet to be identified, or it might be evidence of a new capability of an already-known creature. Then again, it might be coming from a non-living source, too.

There's one clue, however. The sound comes from the ocean's mesopelagic zone, a region between 660 to 3,300 feet below the surface that's too dark for photosynthesis to occur. Since food is scarce there, many of the bizarre organisms that call this region home must migrate up and down the water column en masse on a daily basis to feed. These migrations typically happen at dawn and dusk, which coincides with the weird humming sound.

Researchers have theorized that the hum might be serving as some sort of "dinner bell" for the scores of marine creatures, a signal that tells them when to rise up or down in depth depending on the time of day.

Or perhaps the sound is just the wholesale noise of the migration itself, the cacophony of billions of creatures moving through the depths simultaneously.

The daily migration of organisms that inhabit the mesopelagic zone is no small matter.

The region is home to an unfathomable — and largely unstudied — number of sea creatures, which are estimated to weigh around 10 billion tons all combined. 

The planet's carbon cycle is likely tied in many fundamental ways to this global daily migration.

That we're just now detecting this omnipresent ocean hum is proof that there's much for us to discover about this little-known but vitally important region.

Though it's difficult to pick out from the background noise, you can listen to the hum yourself here, thanks to NPR: http://www.npr.org/player/embed/467428758/467721227   

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/22/467428758/mysterious-ocean-buzz-traced-to-daily-fish-migration

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/wilderness-resources/stories/mysterious-humming-sound-detected-deep-ocean 

Obama: Monumental Audacity

Monumental Audacity — Obama  Grabs  Huge  Western  Lands  by  Executive  Order

William F. Jasper
Wednesday, 17 February 2016 



In a move that has environmental militants exulting and western farmers, ranchers and property owners fuming, Obama has locked up 1.8 million acres by executive fiat, with the stroke of a pen.

Millions more acres are planned to follow, part of the Obama administration’s boast to use “audacious executive actions” — read unconstitutional usurpations — to advance his radical “transformative” agenda during his last months in office.

While in California on a fundraising expedition, Obama took time on February 12 to sign an executive order proclaiming three new national monuments, imposing the strictest of federal restrictions on 1.8 million acres of the Golden State.

The three new illegally created monuments are Mojave Trails National Monument (1.6 million acres), the Sand to Snow National Monument (154,000 acres), and the Castle Mountains National Monument (21,000 acres).

"In addition to permanently protecting incredible natural resources, wildlife habitat and unique historic and cultural sites, and providing recreational opportunities for a burgeoning region, the monuments will support climate resiliency in the region," the White House said in a statement.

However, the designation as monuments means that these newly "protected" areas will be off-limits to mining and mineral exploration, oil and gas drilling, grazing, timber harvest — and even to many of the current recreational uses such as camping, hiking, hunting, fishing, horseback riding and off-road vehicle usage that the public previously has enjoyed. But that’s OK, because it’s all in the greater interest, allegedly, of “protecting” the environment and combatting global warming, according to the president.

As of this writing, the administration’s WhiteHouse.gov website opens with a beautiful landscape photo of sand dunes and rocky crags, with this greeting emblazoned on the desert sky: “Find Your Park — America's Newest National Monuments — Obama designated three new national monuments in the California desert. He has now protected more land and water than any president in history."

Protected? Critics say he has seized or stolen the areas in question. This is but the latest salvo in Obama’s planned lockup of hundreds of millions of acres, which we first exposed in The New American six years ago.

In a 2010 article, The New American's Joe Wolverton reported on a secret 21-page Obama memo revealed by South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint, which identified 14 pieces of land that “might be good candidates” for unilateral executive land grabs utilizing the Antiquities Act. In the past two years, Obama has been especially aggressive in using executive orders to implement these planned lockups.

“We’ll Do Audacious Executive Action"

On January 13, 2016, Obama’s chief of staff, Denis McDonough, bluntly forecast the “audacious” actions to come. Speaking to reporters, McDonough announced: “We’ll do audacious executive action over the course of the rest of the year. I’m confident of that.... We do want to make sure that the executive actions we undertake are not left hanging out there, subject to Congress undoing them."

Obama has repeatedly stated his intention to legislate by executive order from the Oval Office, if Congress doesn’t rubber-stamp his every whim as law. and he has proceeded to make good on that threat, issuing unconstitutional orders on illegal alien amnesty, temporary worker visas, gun control, draconian environmental regulations, and much more.

Designating national monuments is a very important component of his plan for “audacious” executive action. “In his seven years in office, Obama has established 22 national monuments and expanded others to set aside more than 265 million acres of land and water,” noted the UPI news service on February 13. And he’s not through yet.

Among the additional targets in the 'federal' crosshairs is the proposed mammoth Owyhee Canyonlands National Monument in eastern Oregon, encompassing much of the land where the recent conflict erupted that culminated in the shooting death of Arizona rancher LaVoy Finicum by federal and state law enforcement on January 26 and the arrest of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his sons Ammon and Ryan.

The Owyhee Canyonlands proposal would lock up 2.5 million acres, an enormous chunk of Oregon the size of Yellowstone National Park, and would effectively kill cattle ranching in the area, the only viable economic activity in the region since the 'federal' government killed all the timber/wood products industries by closing down the national forests, using various specious environmental concerns.

The gluttonous gobbling up of millions more acres and the hobbling of all means of livelihood for the people who live and work on or near the public lands is a guarantee of escalating conflict.

As we have noted in our recent article “The Federal Bootprint,” the 'federal' agencies managing the national monument lands (National Park Service, BLM, Forest Service) are already grossly mismanaging the vast areas they currently hold and are $16 billion-21 billion behind in critical maintenance. With this record — along with their other atrocious mismanagement records — they have no business adding still more real estate to their portfolio, even if they had constitutional authority to do so — which they don’t.

Article 1, Section 1, Sentence 1 of the U.S. Constitution states: “All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

That’s crystal clear: All legislative (lawmaking) powers are delegated to Congress, not the president or any federal agency or bureaucrat.

Equally important is the “herein granted” clause, which refers specifically to the powers enumerated in Article 1, Section 8. So, even though “all legislative powers” have been bestowed on Congress, those legislative powers may be exercised in only those areas permitted by the Constitution. Presidential usurpation of powers through executive orders has been proceeding for decades, virtually unchallenged, with both Democrat and Republican presidents rampantly abusing the device, always concentrating more and more power in the executive, pushing us ever closer to outright dictatorship.

We have mentioned the enumeration of legislative powers in Article 1, Section 8 of our U.S. Constitution. A crucial feature of this section is the limitation on the federal government’s ownership of land. 

According to the Constitution, our law of the land, “The Congress shall have Power … To exercise exclusive Legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.”

As The New American explained in an earlier article, this means:

The 'federal government' was allowed to have a 10-mile square (100 square miles) for a seat of government. Property for “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals,” etc., for national defense purposes, could be purchased from the states if the state legislatures consented. That’s it. Under Article IV, the federal government is allowed to acquire new territory, which is to be “disposed” of by turning it over to the new state government when the territory is admitted into statehood. Newly created states are to be admitted on an “equal footing” with the original 13 states, meaning with full sovereignty over their lands, not with a distant federal landlord controlling 30 percent, 50 percent, or 90 percent of their land and resources.

The Obama administration and its “green” allies are pushing audaciously and relentlessly now because they are well aware of the mounting anger and resistance to tyrannical 'federal controls'. This is most acutely felt — and emphatically expressed — in the Western states, where the 'federal' bootprint is largest and heaviest, and where efforts are maturing to wrest the “public lands” from 'federal' control and transfer them to the states, where, constitutionally, control belongs.

It is time for the American people to support efforts by legislators and citizens in the Western states to claim their rightful “equal footing” as sovereign states — the same as the rest of the states — not colonies to be ruled by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, or any other federal politician or bureaucrat.

It is also time for the American people to insist that their representatives in Congress stand up to the 'president', take back “all legislative powers herein granted,” limit executive orders to their original executive branch “housekeeping” functions, void the vast majority of previous orders, and stop this audacious, mad rush toward tyranny.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/22565-monumental-audacity-obama-grabs-huge-western-lands-by-executive-order

HOW ABOUT IT AMERICA?  ARE YOU READY TO RESTORE THE REPUBLIC AND FIRE AND ARREST THESE CRIMINALS, PROSECUTE THEM AND GIVE THEM THEIR JUST 'REWARD'?

President John F Kennedy: "This is target 14-A"

The Moment JFK Died
Remote Viewing the Afterlife 

 

 

Published on Feb 22, 2016

http://farsight.org/

This video supplements a two-part project published by The Farsight Institute on the assassination of John F. Kennedy: (1) The Shooters and (2) The Organizers.

 

The footage contained in this video includes perceptions of JFK immediately after his death, footage that was not included in the original two-part project, mostly because of time limitations.

 

Finally, this stunning afterlife material collected by Daz Smith can see the light of day. In this beautiful film produced and directed by Dick Allgire, remote viewer Daz Smith sets out on an incredible journey as he works a blind remote viewing target for the Farsight Institute. He's told nothing more than "this is target 14-A," but finds himself witnessing the John F. Kennedy assassination, and Kennedy's transformation at his moment of physical death.

 

This video gives an inside look at the remote viewing process and a dramatic example of where it can take you.

 

http://farsight.org/FarsightPress/JFK%20Afterlife_Farsight_Project_main_page.html

Build your immune system - Dr Mount

BUILD YOUR IMMUNE SYSTEM

DR. WILLIAM MOUNT

WE STAND: AND OPEN LETTER TO THE FBI AGENTS THAT KILLED LAVOY FINICUM IN OREGON.....

 

 

We Stand: An Open Letter To The Three FBI Agents That Killed LaVoy Finicum In Oregon.....This One Needs To Go Viral...

 

Posted By: Watchman
Date: Friday, 26-Feb-2016 16:56:43

I’ve thought about you. All three of you, with your guns pointed at LaVoy Finicum. The video still haunts me. I would have been the first one to give you the benefit of the doubt. I was raised around law enforcement. I know good men in law enforcement. But that changed for me, as it did thousands of Americans, with the events that unfurled in Oregon as I felt utterly stunned at what I viewed in that video. I watched the grainy version of the video that the FBI administration released of LaVoy Finicums death, even though I knew that with our technology today, they have better, more clear footage and footage with audio from this event. But you will not release that, it is too incriminating for the FBI. They did this with purpose to deceive the public and that video would have revealed to the world your actions that day . This footage you did release, left people arguing about what they were seeing in the blurry video rather than to bring their attention to the way that three FBI agents ambushed and murdered an innocent, non-violent rancher with no criminal history. A man with a large family. A good man. A man who never threatened you. The FBI had clearly set this up in advance with stops prepared and dozens of agents ready to end the protest because four weeks of a land rights issues protest was all the patience they could muster. The protesters had left the ranch many times before and on this day we’re headed for a meeting to inform ranchers of their rights. You knew that. You stopped the two cars and started shooting at LaVoy’s truck full of passengers- unprovoked. They never brandished a weapon against you. Finicum told you he was driving to the Sheriffs office for protection from you. The only place he felt safe. You fired on his vehicle. You could have just followed him if you had ever intended to have a peaceful outcome. But that was never your intention. Finicum knew why the local law enforcement wasn’t invited to this event- why the local Sheriff was intentionally kept at bay- Finicum feared what you would do to him with no local oversight. The Sheriff of Grant County, just over the county line where you ambushed him, valued Constitutional rights and Finicum knew the Sheriff would never approve of an ambush on the highway and and execution of a protester. A tax-paying citizen who loved America could not trust you and fled for his life because he knew you could murder him and get away with it. Let that sink in. When Finicum got out of his vehicle with his hands up, within seconds you gathered around him and shot him in the back. You shot him him in the back. Who would carry out such a cowardly deed? Who would follow orders to shoot a rancher with his hands up and shoot him in the back seconds after getting out of his vehicle? The three of you would do this. What were you thinking? How do you reconcile this in your head and in your heart? No talking? Not one attempt at a peaceful negotiation? At the refuge all he did was talk to you, never threatened you. His hands were UP. Did your conscience allow you to shoot him without anyreservation? After his lifeless body dropped into the snow, you cared so little for this fellow citizen that you walked around his body and didn’t check for a pulse for 15 minutes? Why? Because of your guilt or because you had such little regard for him or for human life in general? Both of those answers are equally terrifying to me. Moments later you shot rounds of ammunition into Finicum’s truck with scared women inside screaming for help- trying to surrender. You threw gas cans inside the vehicle. Is this how you do it now? Are you sincerely okay with this? Look at what you have become. By a miracle they survived. Before you hunted him down and silenced him like wild game, Finicum carried out two heroic acts. As he turned the blind corner on the highway, he almost ran into your barricade head on, as vehicles and men stood standing in the middle of the highway at your “stop”. He veered to the left on the snowbank to avoid hitting you. To preserve your lives. He then got out of the vehicle with his hands up to divert your attention from his truck with passengers inside, so you would stop firing upon them. To preserve their lives. This is the man you surrounded and killed within seconds. You killed a hero. I wonder what has happened to my America where you could easily tell the good guys from the bad guys. Are you mercenaries now? Carrying out executions on demand? Have you realized yet that you did the bidding of a government that is seeking to violate the property rights and steal the land of your fellow citizens? Do you realize that you are a citizen and that these ranchers were standing up for YOUR rights, too? Or have you not realized this. Most Americans won’t take the time to do the research to find out that you shot him in the back before he ever reached for his stomach – the area where you shot him. And your bosses instructed the media to tell everyone he reached for a gun to justify this cowardly act of murder on a fellow citizen. What a pathetic cover-up for your actions that day. I’m asking all three of you who carried out the execution of Finicum, to RESIGN. Resign, because I have to know that you will never be allowed to act with force again. I have to know that men like you would not be allowed to continue on as FBI agents. If you are rewarded for this dastardly act, I will lose all faith in our justice system. We need men with a conscience and a soul in law enforcement. We need good men who are there to protect the citizens rights. Your fellow men. You took an oath to defend the Constitution. Did you understand this oath when you excitedly repeated its words to get your badge? It wasn’t a promise. It was an oath. An oath to protect and to serve- us. LaVoy was one of US. Are you going to protect us or are you going to protect orders? Even if those orders compel you to disregard someone’s Constitutional rights in the most brazen and corrupt and evil way? Was this you “just doing your job”, so that you could end their protest? Millions of people have died as a result of those ” just doing their job”. Under Hitler. Under Stalin. Is this who you have become? Shooting someone with their hands up because you were told to? You can no longer hide behind the lie that you felt threatened enough to shoot him dead. With a dozen or more of you ready to attack him, the only one that felt threatened was Finicum, I assure you. You murdered an innocent man. The salt of the earth. A man who would have stood up for you and who would have respected you. A man who would have shaken your hand and talked to about his love for America. You killed him. Let me ask you this. In all of your years in the FBI, how many ranchers have ever threatened you or have drawn weapons on you? I’m guessing the thugs you deal with everyday do not include ranchers and farmers. How many ranchers over the years have left their working farms, to protest over the stealing of another ranchers land and imprisonment? I’m guessing probably none. Here’s the difficult question. After decades of government abuse to rancher’s property rights, how many ranchers have YOU defended, or aided, or stood for- because you did take an oath to defend the Constitutional rights of those in your care. I am going to guess that you have never stood for any of these men against the abuse of the government. You have become pawns. You are protecting the governments special interests, not the people’s. Resign, so I can sleep at night with some of my faith in America restored. Resign, so I can tell my kids to respect the FBI. Resign, because I need to know there are not monsters out there with guns and badges that will do anything they are told to do, like killing innocent Americans, because we could be next. Resign. WHOEVER WROTE THIS DID A DISSERVICE BY NOT POSTING THAT ALL OR MOST OF THESE MERCS WITH THE FBI AND BLM ARE ALL FRENCH MERCS...  IT IS TIME TO LIGHT THESE BASTARDS UP.... THEY ARE LAUGHING IN THE WRITERS FACE.... HANG-UM-HIGH!! You may be a fellow citizen, but you are not my fellow American. http://foxnews1450.com/2016/02/25/an-open-letter-to-the-three-fbi-agents-that-killed-lavoy-finicum-in-oregon/

BIDEN TO MEXICO: "Only the violent crazy outcasts of American society...

Jimstone.is - World Class Investigative Truth  http://82.221.129.208/ifyouareinamericayouprobablycantseethism5.html

Feb 26 2016

BIDEN TO MEXICO: "Only the violent crazy outcasts of American society think there is an immigrant problem."

Biden was on Mexican television last night, and he made my gut churn. It was like a hypnotizing horror show, I could not turn it off. And during that show, I learned that:

Americans who think there is an immigration problem are extremely fringe people who have little to no education, WITHOUT EXCEPTION.

Trump is an irresponsible psychopath who is dangerous, likely to be a murderer, and probably escaped from Bellview to subsequently receive a new identity, from which he terrorizes much of the civilized world.

All Americans who should not be in prison love the immigrants and welcome them with open arms. Absolutely every American who is not both insane and illiterate wants 5 times as many illegal immigrants, and also wants to hand them everything, so they do not even need to work when they get to the U.S.

Biden kept repeating over and over again these exact lines: "The American people love Mexicans, except for an extremely dangerous radical fringe" "The American people love Mexicans and Mexico, exept for an extremely dangerous tiny minority" "The ONLY Americans who do not love Mexicans are dangerous and illiterate"

It went on and on and on, and I was absolutely blown away. Biden actually scared me last night, because he said these things in a way which implied that they would soon be enforced as law. And the magnitude of the lie - I do not even need to mention that. The attitude, where "if you do not like losing your job to an illegal, you are violent and illiterate" is exactly the type of attitude you get from enemy soldiers who are ripping your society apart for the final takedown, "If you disagree you are dangerous." 

Yes I'd say, only to an enemy that might be afraid of being shot for destroying the nation.

Biden clearly displayed the depths to which the communist/leftist faction of America has already sunk to. They actually have the audacity to marginalize main street America as dangerous, illiterate, and violent. And that is who the prison camps would obviously be for, RIGHT?

Dave Hodges: This is a can’t miss interview. Make it VIRAL - Americans NEED TO KNOW!

  The Coming Trump Assassination and the Scalia Murder - Doug Hagmann Interviews Dave Hodges

 

24 Feb, 2016 by Dave Hodges

 

 

Doug Hagmann interviewed Dave Hodges on several critical issues including the following:

1. The intent of the Department of Justice to arrest members of the Independent Media for covering issues related to what the 'government' calls 'domestic terrorism' (e.g. pro-Second Amendment, pro-Constitution, identifying criminality of the 'federal government' and its 'officials', etc).
2. The murder of Justice Scalia because of his opposition to Obama’s draconian climate change policies.
3. The possibility of a military coup that will remove Obama from the presidency.
4. The coming civil war (UWEX 16)

   This is a can’t miss interview. 

Please make this go viral as this interview could serve 

as a rallying cry to wake up Americans 

from their slumber.

 Dave Hodges on The Hagmann Report 

 

 

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2016/02/24/the-coming-trump-assassination-and-scalia-murder-doug-hagmann-interviews-dave-hodges/

Will a Second Military Coup Finally Unseat Obama?

Dave Hodges
Feb 24 2016
 
In the world of an "Et tu Brute" coup against the established political leadership, there are two separate and distinct kinds of coup.

First, there is the coup of opportunity. The coup of opportunity occurs, as luck would have it, when circumstances present an opportunity for the military to force a change in leadership.

The second kind of coup involves a general discontent among military leadership along with allies within the 'government', and this kind of coup almost always has the backing of the majority of the citizenry.

A Coup of Opportunity

A distinct coup of opportunity took place during the establishment’s “stand down” position while Ambassador Stevens and his security fought for their lives at Benghazi. The attack on Benghazi took place at a time when Obama was changing military commanders faster than most people change their socks. Under Obama, nobody in the military could have felt secure in their positions. The military had come to see how they had been sold out by Obama and American military lives were at risk. For that matter, the entire country was at risk under Obama’s leadership.

As a prelude to the attack on Benghazi, Stevens had been trafficking in guns, drugs and children on behalf of the CIA for the express purpose of raising funds, Iran-Contra style, for Middle East Terrorist groups. These facts were leaking out and 2012, was an election year and the leak had to be plugged.

Stevens knew he was in danger as his requests for a stronger body guard contingent went ignored by his boss at the time, Hillary Clinton. I subsequently learned that Stevens reached out to the military command structure in the area and asked for help in the event he was attacked. The traditional American military was all too happy to help because Stevens could have brought down the Obama administration in a post-rescue scenario as he would have sung like a canary as to the kinds of criminal activities that the administration was engaged in.

The two military who were going to rescue Stevens and change the course of military history were AFRICOM’s commanding officer, General Carter Ham, and Carrier task force commander, Admiral Charles M. Gayouette.

The positions held by Hamm and Gayouette are so powerful and so sensitive, their replacements required approval from the Senate.  Both leaders were jointly attempting to rescue Ambassador Stevens and his bodyguards, despite being told to stand down by Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta. There is now proof that Obama was warned in advance of the coming attack in which Stevens begged for more protection and his impassioned plea was denied by Clinton.

As Stevens was begging for help after the attack had begun, General Hamm had activated a special forces team within minutes of learning that the embassy, which was really a CIA safe house, was under attack. When General Ham received his “stand down” orders from Obama, he made plans to go ahead with the rescue and was arrested within minutes of contravening he order by his second in command, General Rodriquez, of the CIA.

Admiral Gayouette, the commander of Carrier Strike Group Three, was preparing to provide intelligence and air cover for General Hamm’s rescue team in violation of his standing orders and he was promptly relieved of command for “allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment.                                         


General Ham had been in command of the initial 2011 US-NATO military intervention in Libya and we can, in part, read from US military insider accounts of this growing internal conflict between the White House and US Military leaders.  It is abundantly clear that had Obama been concerned for saving the lives of the four murdered Americans, American forces could have stopped the mortar fire that eventually killed Ambassador Stevens. However, Panetta and Obama blocked any rescue attempt. In legal parlance, Obama, Panetta and Clinton were, at minimum, accomplices to murder.

I was given this information in September of 2012 and told to publish these accounts. I hesitated for a couple of weeks because I did not feel that I had enough supporting information. I was repeatedly told to throw caution to the wind and publish this story. I was further told that I would be vindicated when the inevitable Congressional investigation would take place. This, indeed, ended up being the case.

As I look back on the Benghazi days, it is clear that even though the coup failed to produce its final and desired result, a message had been sent to and among key military leaders that there was a military contingent that was not going to capitulate to the illegal alien occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Boulevard.

The Benghazi affair was a failed coup of opportunity.

 A Planned Military Coup 

 

A planned coup, as opposed to a coup of opportunity, requires elaborate and secret planning.  The element of surprise is essential in this type of coup.

The 1960’s movie, The Seven Days in May, starring Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas captured many of these elements.  The one essential element that was missing from the aforementioned movie was that every successful coup of this type requires the eventual support of the people. The coup of opportunity at Benghazi required no such public approval. The scandal, as revealed by Stevens, would have produced the desired political change.

In the aftermath of Benghazi, and out of ignorance, I asked my insider source if there was going to be a coup any time soon, as I lamented how close the country came to ridding itself of its biggest threat. I was told in unequivocal terms that the dumbed down status of the Americans prevented any such planned coup from transpiring and that another coup of opportunity would have to present itself before there could be another attempt.

Another Coup of Opportunity

From both the circumstantial evidence and recent events, there may very well be another coup of opportunity.

It is being widely reported that U.S. General Joseph Dunford ordered the 'President' to steer clear of Scalia’s funeral following a conversation that Dunford had with Russian Colonel General Bondarev in which he was asked why Obama had attended a secret meeting with Scalia shortly before his death and had wondered out loud why Scalia did not have an autopsy. This information has been widely circulated and surprisingly, it is not getting the traction that it should be getting.

Scalia, as the leader of the conservative element of the Supreme Court, was Obama’s biggest obstacle with regard to Obama fulfilling his prime directive as 'President', namely to install a rigid cap and trade system which would permanently destroy the economic backbone of the country.

It has also been determined that Scalia had a secret meeting that has leaked out with Obama shortly before his death but after the Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, struck down Obama’s key Climate Change initiatives. I am not privy to what Obama told Scalia, but I think it is safe to say they were not booking tee times on the golf course.

The feud between Obama and Scalia led to the following statements made by Scalia about the possibility of Obama taking retribution against Scalia. In 2012, in a Fox news interview, Scalia publicly refuted the notion that Obama would retaliate against him for his rulings which ran in the face of the Obama administration.

Justice Scalia

What can Obama do to me?

Published on Feb 18, 2016

In July 2012, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was interviewed by Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. After reviewing a clip of Obama saying he felt confident the Supreme Court would not overturn the Affordable Health Act legislation, Wallace asked, “Justice, what did you think of that?" Scalia was also asked if he felt pressured by the administration to vote a certain way on Obamacare after the president publicly called the court out during an April press conference.

This was a very telling interview and one can see how Scalia totally underestimated Obama’s potential for retribution. Add to these facts the information that Scalia was was found with a pillow case on his face is mind- boggling. This was a message killing. However, as I have been told, the message to all is that nobody is safe from the despot-in-chief and subsequently, some feel they have little to lose with regard to acting against this 'President'.

A Constitutional Crisis Could Force Obama Out Of White House

In the recent interview with Trunews, retired U.S. Air Force Lt. General Thomas McInerney and Retired U.S. Army General Paul Vallely talked seriously about the possibility of a “Constitutional crisis” that could occur at the hands of President Barack Obama. This was the proverbial “pillow case” over Obama’s face. It is not a physical threat, but it certainly is a political threat.

“According to the report General Dunford lashed out at Bondarev claiming “of course the bastard [Obama] murdered him“.

 Generals: Constitutional Crisis 

Could Force Military To Remove Obama

Conclusion

 

My source has told me that Obama will not take the fall for the assassination of Scalia, as he was too well insulated. However, as Commander-In-Chief, Obama has a fiduciary duty to protect the American people from foreign and domestic enemies. The failure to do could result in a potential reality if Obama refuses to protect the American people from the threat of ISIS and other known terror groups.

To date, Obama has refused to even acknowledge muslim extremism as a threat. And Obama has appointed several members to his administration who have active ties to the terrorist group known as the Muslim Brotherhood. This cannot be setting well with the military as we have troops fighting and dying in Afghanistan against these same types of people.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking that Obama does not have a contingency plan.  He does. The multitude of foreign troops on our soil is a presidential insurance policy. Further, UWEX 16, the ongoing civil war drill going on in Texas speaks to what Obama is expecting to come his way.

http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2016/02/24/will-a-second-military-coup-finally-unseat-obama/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=will-a-second-military-coup-finally-unseat-obama

Why is the Government Building Mental Hospitals In Remote Locations?

 

 

 

 

 

22 Feb, 2016 by Dave Hodges

 

This is freaky........

Why is the government building massive amounts of mental hospitals in REMOTE locations?

What does this have to do with Jade Helm 16 (i.e. UWEX 16)? How do our abandoned veterans figure into this covert plot?

Will Donald Trump be assassinated now that he is clearly the front runner?

What are the odds? How will it be done?

Will a patsy be recruited to carry out the deed?

How is Trump like Robert Kennedy in 1968?

Is the 'government', as Jesse Ventura once asserted, carrying out super soldier experiments with human/animal hybirds?

This is beyond belief.

These are the topics of Dave Hodges’ interview with popular talk show host Josh Coy.

To listen, click here.


http://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/2016/02/22/why-is-the-government-building-mental-hospitals-in-remote-locations/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=why-is-the-government-building-mental-hospitals-in-remote-locations

Chernobyl On The Hudson - a disaster in the making

Chernobyl On The Hudson

Alex Jones

Feb 23, 2016

 

It has been nicknamed Chernobyl on the Hudson. Lying just 34 miles north of New York City’s Central Park, the Indian Point Energy Center has been leaking the radioactive material known as tritium into the groundwater. 

On February 6, 2016 New York Governor Andrew Cuomo finally alerted the public as to the potential catastrophe. Better late than never? Potential nuclear disasters occurring at the Indian Point Energy Center now managed by the Louisiana based Entergy Corporation have been ongoing since 1973.

Obviously, Indian Point could potentially be a repeat of the level 7 Fukushima Daiichi disaster if a nuclear meltdown occurs due to a hurricane or other natural event leading to equipment failures. However, a similar disaster would require the evacuation of 5.6 million people and render Manhattan a no go zone for decades.

In 2004, a study by the Union of Concerned Scientists estimated as many as 44,000 near-term deaths from acute radiation syndrome and as many as 518,000 long-term cancer deaths could occur in people within 50 miles of Indian Point in the event of a severe accident. Potential disaster models reveal the Indian Point plume could reach Chernobyl mass event levels nine times the radiation released at Fukushima.

Indian Point is just one of at least five damaged nuclear power plants in the United States. They are obviously targets for terrorists. Just one more reason why we need our borders closed to Obama’s unconstitutional Executive Order on Immigration.

Chernobyl On The Hudson

 

IRAQ NEW 50,000-DINAR NOTE (356) CONFIRMED

 

Iraq new 50,000-dinar note (B356) confirmed

Just sharing with those who are interested.... 

 

Iraq

Banknote News

http://www.banknotenews.com/files/tag-iraq.php

Jan 01, 2016 11:16 AM Category: Middle East

According to an Arabic press release dated 11 November 2015 (English translation here), the Central Bank of Iraq introduced the following 50,000-dinar note.

B356 (PNL): 50,000 dinars (US$42)
Brown, green, yellow, and blue. Front: Assyrian jar as blue-to-green SPARK patch; water wheel on the Euphrates river; palm trees; flying birds; Gali Ali Beg waterfall in Kurdistan; Assyrian palm tree as registration device. Back: Assyrian palm tree; fishermen poling canoes through marshes with flying ducks, water buffalos, reed house; outline map of Iraq showing Euphrates and Tigris rivers; palm trees. varifeye thread with spiral minaret, Malwiya Tower, at the Great Mosque of Samarra. 4-mm wide purple-to-green RollingStar Cube windowed security thread with demetalized Arabic text (The Central Bank of Iraq). Watermark: Horse head and electrotype 50000. Printer: (G&D). 156 x 65 mm.
a. ٢٠١٥ - ١٤٣٦ (2015/AH1436). Signature 18. Prefix ١/٨. Intro: 11.11.2015.

Scalia’s Supreme Court seat

Surprise: Obama vetting GOP Gov. Brian Sandoval for Scalia’s Supreme Court seat

4:01 pm on February 24, 2016
Allahpundit

 

 

Gotta give credit where it’s due. Obama and his pal Harry know how to troll Republicans.

Brian Sandoval, the centrist Republican governor of Nevada, is being vetted by the White House for a possible nomination to the Supreme Court, according to two people familiar with the process.
Sandoval is increasingly viewed by some key Democrats as perhaps the only nominee President Obama could select who would be able to break a Republican blockade in the Senate…
Sandoval met Monday with Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid, a fellow Nevadan with whom he enjoys cordial relations.
A person familiar with the conversation said that while Sandoval told Reid he had not made a final decision on whether he would accept a Supreme Court nomination, he would allow the vetting process to move forward. Another person in Nevada familiar with the process confirmed that the process is underway.

Sandoval is pro-choice, expanded Medicaid, and oversaw Nevada’s construction of its own ObamaCare exchange (after the first attempt went sideways). He’s as “friendly” to Democrats as a modern Republican gets.Even so, I’m trying to imagine the reaction on the right if a Supreme Court vacancy opened up and a Republican president decided to bypass scores of conservative justices to nominate a center-left Democrat. And not just any center-left Democrat but someone who’s arguably underqualified: Sandoval spent a few years as attorney general of Nevada and then a handful more as a federal district judge, but most SCOTUS nominees have extensive appellate experience. Maybe Obama could sell this to the left on grounds that, with a Republican majority in the Senate vowing they’ll obstruct anyone he puts forward, a centrist Republican nominee is the best they can hope for. I doubt the right would go for that if the tables were turned, though; they’d want a Republican president to name a mainstream conservative and then fight tooth and nail to break the Senate’s will.
Maybe Obama could convince liberals that naming Sandoval would be worth it for the lulz. McConnell and Grassley would start to sweat as the White House proclaimed that the GOP is so intractable they’d actually block a member of their own party from the High Court out of personal pique towards Obama. Dean Heller, the Republican senator from Nevada, would likely cave immediately and call for McConnell to confirm Sandoval. The usual suspects, like Kirk, Collins, McCain, and Graham, would crumble too and join him. Soon you’d have open warfare within the GOP over whether to at least give Sandoval a Judiciary Committee hearing, and once the hearing was held there’d be pressure for a vote, and once that vote was held there’d be pressure for a floor vote. Like I say, Obama and Reid know how to troll. Kicking Sandoval onto the Supreme Court would also remove a major political stumbling block for Democrats in Nevada. Sandoval has been touted as an eventual Senate candidate; in the post-Trump GOP, with centrism newly respectable on the right again, it’s not nutty to think he’d have a half-serious eleventh-hour conversion on abortion down the road and run for president. Putting him on the Court, where he’ll be a reliable vote for Roe, would extract him from the political arena in his home state and beyond for the rest of his life. And Sandoval seems open to the opportunity:

“It would be a privilege,” Sandoval said Saturday. The Supreme Court “is the essence of justice in this country.”
Sandoval was unanimously confirmed by the Senate when he was nominated to a district court position by President George W. Bush in 2005, on Reid’s recommendation. He quit four years later to mount a challenge to Nevada’s incumbent governor, a race he won easily. But Sandoval has always said he wouldn’t mind returning to the bench at some point.
“I loved my job as a judge when I did it,” Sandoval said Saturday. “I, as I sit here, don’t know what I’m going to do next. But I do know I’m the governor of Nevada.”…
Asked which Supreme Court justices he admired, Sandoval pointed to Sandra Day O’Connor, who served in Arizona’s state legislature before becoming a federal judge and, eventually, the first woman to serve on the high court.

How does O’Connor II sound, conservatives? Look on the bright side: This time, at least you’ll know going in that Sandoval’s prepared to sell you out on abortion.
Now, let me blow your mind with a hypothesis: With Trump as the near-certain GOP nominee, the Senate Republican majority is better off making a deal with Obama to confirm someone this year than waiting for the results of the election. Think about it. If Hillary wins, she’ll want to impress liberals who held their noses and turned out for her so she’ll nominate someone who’s reliably left-wing. The GOP could block that nominee, as we’ll have enough seats for a filibuster next year even in a worst-case scenario, but Schumer could always nuke the filibuster — and even if he doesn’t, there’s no running out the clock on Hillary. You can Bork her first nominee, but resistance will wear down for the second. She’ll wait us out. If Trump wins, meanwhile, the Senate GOP will be a in bind. They can work on him behind the scenes to appoint a strong conservative to the Court, but Trump’s likely to drift towards the center, not towards the right, in the general election. If he beats Hillary, it’ll be with a centrist coalition. He may try to reward those voters and set the tone for his presidency with a centrist Court nominee capable of winning votes from both parties. What do Senate Republicans do then, with the new leader of the party fresh off his stunning presidential victory? Do they dare try to Bork his choice right out of the gate? Not a chance, I think, which means you’re trusting Donald Trump to make a strong conservative pick and spare them that dilemma. How lucky do you feel?
All of that being so, the Senate GOP may never have as much leverage over the next justice as it does right now. Republicans have a majority for the moment and they’re under far less pressure to confirm an Obama nominee than they’d be under with Hillary or Trump in the White House. If you believe the conventional wisdom about Trump as a weak nominee with poor favorables who’ll ruin Republicans down-ballot, they’re also far less likely to maintain that Senate majority next year than they’d be with Rubio at the top of the ticket. They can dictate some terms if they want to make a deal with O right now (although not on abortion, alas). With Hillary or Trump, they might not be able to dictate any. Why wait for next year, then, rather than make a deal right now?

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/02/24/surprise-obama-vetting-gop-gov-brian-sandoval-for-scalias-supreme-court-seat/