Sunday, July 24, 2016

MORT’s meanderings


Obama steps out of the Anti-America / Pro-Islam closet and boldly proclaims:  
‘It’s radical Islam terrorism Folks, get used to it.’

C’mon now, of course he didn’t come right out and say that in those exact words.  But, he threw a hissy-fit and asserted that use of certain phrases and words would not have stopped the massacre in Orlando.  In charged rhetoric so typical of Obama, he pivoted from the clear facts in evidence, to blaming availability of guns to an individual intent on committing such a hate crime.
He followed all that by sending his toady Attorney General Loretta Lynch (Eric Holder, in drag) on a whirlwind tour of the Sunday shows, to codify his convoluted explanation. During her pronouncements at each of these venues, she advised the mass media why content of the phone call by murderer Omar Mateen during his bloody killing spree, would not be included in the official account.  Her take was that it would only encourage more self-radicalized, ‘lone wolf’ copycats to commit hate crimes however, the real reason for the erasure of this significant part of the story is that it could have a deleterious effect on the electoral hopes of Democrats. Shades of a former Sunday show cover-up by Susan Rice.  Does anyone recognize a pattern, here?
Obama has declared war on the reporting of facts that differ with his agenda; the use of terms he deems as derogatory to Islam; and he has issued a thinly-veiled threat to anyone who might be thinking about telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth, regarding the horror that was the Orlando massacre.   
Obama leaves no doubt where he stands.  He hates our Liberty and the freedoms that are guaranteed to every legitimate citizen of the USA by the Constitution of the United States of America.  Further, that he is committed to Islam in every detail of whichever interpretation might be put onto that oppressive way of life. Frankly, my Dear, I don’t give a damn what he thinks – he stinks. .Beyond that, he can believe that the Sun rises and sets on his image – which I really do think he believes. The truth is, that from the outset of his time in office, it has been his intention to destroy this nation as it was conceived by the Founding Fathers – and he has come pretty damned close to doing it.  Except that for him, there is still that annoying, tenacious thing -  ‘right & wrong’.
The Founding Fathers had it right.  We have it right. Barack Hussein Obama has it all wrong, dead wrong, all the time. All his bluster, lies, colossal arrogance and smooth talky-talk can’t change that.  We’ll survive this election as we’ve managed to come through the nearly eight years of Obama’s diabolical misuse and blatant abuse of our First and Second Amendment rights.  We are decidedly worse for the wear but, we shall recover because we are Americans and we’re made of some pretty tough stuff.
All Obama has going for him is his classic case of Narcissism and a corrupted media.
He is a villain right out of ‘Dante’s Inferno’ and beyond all comparison.  He is a miscreant without a single redeeming feature.. It will take several generations for patriotic Americans to get his stench out of their nostrils.  We on the other hand, shall win because our hearts are true and our cause is just.  If you do not share this same philosophy then, go vote for Hillary – not only more of the same but, much worse.
Here’s my take:  May all true Americans who have boundless faith in their Faith and in their Creator, be blessed with living to see and enjoy a rebirth of this nation as a nation that is universally rededicated to the tenets of The Constitution, as originally conceived.
If it works out that this can only be possible without the presence and misguided influence of Progressives (meaning those dyed-in-the-wool Democrats and any turn coat Republicans-in-name-only), then that is the price we shall have to pay.  
Where do I sign up?

                  MORT KUFF  © 6-20-2016







Bookmark and Share

Thursday, July 21, 2016

An “Amnesia Stonewall”!


How can so-called very intelligent politicians, who seem to remember anything that might get them votes, suddenly get a case of an “Amnesia Stonewall” when asked questions about certain situations by investigators pertaining to their jobs or positions that they hold.

As the F.B.I. continues its investigation into the use of a private e-mail server used by Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State, the people closest to her (her aides) have had a problem remembering what they saw and heard regarding the e-mail matter. The phrases, “I don't recall”, and “I don't remember”, tumble off their lips when asked some very pertinent questions which they should have been able to answer with little or no problem. Do you think they might be covering up for their boss? This is a scenario just like the members of the Mafia have used when they were questioned about their unlawful activities. The phrase, “I don't know nuttin” was a common answer by the mobsters, most likely under advice of their lawyers.

The Obama Administration at the beginning of 2009 stated that they would be the most transparent administration in history, but its been one stonewall after another as the Obama Administration has erected roadblocks when they were asked about certain policies and actions that needed answers. Examples of this “stonewall” were the investigations into “Fast and Furious” (guns sold to Mexican drug cartels), the I.R.S. targeting of conservative groups by denying them a beneficial tax status, the Benghazi debacle (blaming a non-descript video as the cause of the deadly assault against our compound where 4 Americans were killed, including or ambassador to Libya) etc.

This practice of the “Amnesia Stonewall” is not new to the Clinton's. That's been their “modus operandi” ever since they entered politics in Arkansas, through their time spent in the White House, and up to the present day. Both Hillary and Bill could normally rattle off one statistic after another with precise accuracy, but when they were questioned and confronted with possible problems in regards to their actions and with interchanges and dealings with their political cronies, they suddenly had a lapse of recall and they stated that they couldn't remember, or in the case of their underlings, by the use of the 5th Amendment, which protects people from possible self-incrimination by answering questions about their involvement in the action being investigated.

Highly intelligent people who surround Hillary Clinton by the names of Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin, and Brian Pagliano (the fellow who set up Hillary's unlawful private e-mail server), all have had extreme lapses of memory. The obvious conclusion, by these aides taking the 5th or by not remembering, is that they all had something to hide from the investigators or authorities. Unfortunately, it seems to have served the Clinton's well over the years. That's why they have been able to avoid “prison time” when lesser mortals have wound up in the slammer and, in addition, saddled with very large fines. (ex: former Virginia Bob McDonnell who is now waiting to serve a term in jail, and former Gen. David Petraeus who was found guilty of doing less than what Hillary has been accused of).

I guess you could say it's important to have friends in high places to help deflect the obvious “sins” that the Clinton's have committed over the years. It has also been beneficial for the Clinton's to have uncompromising support of the Democrat Party. It seems that the Democrats want to hear no evil, see no evil, and speak no evil, when it comes to Hillary and her husband Bill. It seems that party loyalty takes precedence over ethical behavior within the Democrat Party.

Yes, the “Amnesia Stonewall” is alive and well in Wash. D.C., and the Clinton's are poster people to show how to use it for their benefit, and how to avoid the consequences of their actions.

Conservative Commentary by Chuck Lehmann










Bookmark and Share

Sunday, July 17, 2016

Cashing in on lies


So called neo liberals who have appeared on the political scene
expect law abiding citizens to accept rabble rousers as legitimate
protesters. This new crop of anarchists call their advocacy " black
lives matter," derived from the big lie concocted in Ferguson, Mo.
and Baltimore, Md. Anyone citing their illegitimacy is labeled racist
or unfeeling.

To connote the actions of these very few, the repulsive "N" word, a
denotative definition of lazy, ignorant, worthless piece of humanity,
still used by white supremacists and blacks, is unacceptable in
today's society, so it's obvious a new, none racial descriptive word
must be found and fitting that will apply to this and other groups
backed by the likes of Al Sharpton, George Soros and the bleeding
heart pseudo liberals.

Conservative column from George Giftos






Steven Crowder - DEBUNKED: #BlackLivesMatter Propaganda Exposed Case-By-Case













Bookmark and Share

Thursday, July 14, 2016

The Fix Was In!


Does any objective observer not think that the “fix” was in by the FBI and the Justice Dep't. by not indicting Hillary Clinton for “gross negligence” (a/k/a “extreme carelessness”), for putting our national security in jeopardy by using a personal server in the conduct of her duties as Secretary of State? Months ago, Pres. Obama said that he saw no crime committed by Hillary and that it was just a “mistake” on her part, which she has apologized for. How did he know, was he part of the investigation or was he sending a message to the FBI and Justice Dep't. that he expected no indictment. Something smells rotten in Denmark, as the old expression goes.

During the testimony of the FBI Director, James Comey, before the Congressional Oversight Committee, he was asked if he attended the interrogation of Hillary by the FBI - he replied that he did not. He also was asked if Hillary was put under oath - he replied she was not. In addition, he was asked if her testimony during the FBI “interview” was recorded - his answer was no it was not. And the kicker to all , he was asked if he was he aware of the results of the interview by questioning all the actual interrogators - he said he did not, he only read the summary of the interview. But, even after admitting those disclosures, he was able to somehow determine, in a couple of days, that she committed no crime in his 13 minutes of damning disclosures and two minutes of exoneration. It just doesn't add up.

As stated above, Comey's presentation was approximately 15 minutes long and for the first 13 minutes, he laid out a “prima facie” case of why she violated the rules and protocols of the State Dep't. and the civil code. It was a damning list of lies she has told over the past year and a half , and it certainly looked like he laying the groundwork for recommending that the Justice Dep't. convene a grand jury to hear the information that they gathered. But, after the 13 minutes of damning rhetoric by Comey, he did a complete 180 degree turn around and stated that he wouldn't think that a “competent prosecutor” would try this case with the evidence at hand, and that he would not recommend an indictment.

Many people in law enforcement and the legal profession were amazed at his reasoning, and some friends of his who worked with him in the past were totally shocked by his incomprehensible decision. Included among the critics were his former boss in the federal prosecutors office, former Mayor of the City of New York, Rudy Giuiliani, and former Ass't. Director of the FBI, James Kallstrom, among others, who said they thought that Comey was totally mistaken in his judgment.

We cannot know what went through the mind of James Comey, but it does give the impression and appearance of a pre-determined outcome with political overtones. Why else would Pres. Obama weigh in months ago about the “innocence” of Hillary, and why would Hillary, when asked if she feared indictment, she said over and over again that there wasn't a chance of that happening. Doesn't that give the appearance of a “fix” in the eventual outcome?

James Comey has been touted as a person above reproach and a “straight shooter”, but one has to wonder how he could come up with that convoluted decision that he came up with. Was he looking to not be the one who derailed the presidential candidacy of Hillary Clinton, or was he just trying to appease the political establishment and the Wash. D.C elites even though the evidence pointed otherwise.

My opinion is that, “the fix was in” from the beginning, and Hillary has skated free for the umpteenth time, giving credence to the phrase that in Wash. D.C. “it's not what you know it's who you know” and it is obvious that there is a two-tier system of justice - one for the “connected” (the Clinton's), and one for the average Joe. We seem to be fulfilling the prophesy of the late judge William Bork, who said we were “slouching toward Gomorrah”. Let's hope we don't fulfill his prophesy.

Conservative commentary by Chuck Lehmann









It takes Bill Whittle 93 seconds to show Hillary Clinton guilty of violating three separate Federal Statutes. It takes another three minutes to explain why she and B. Hussein Obama simply DO NOT CARE.



Bookmark and Share

Sunday, July 10, 2016

MORT’ meanderings


“This isn’t who we are”.
“This is who we are”.     
                                                                      -  Barack Obama
As a native born citizen of these United States in full possession of all my senses – and exercising my right as one for whom this Government is Constitutionally obligated to serve rather than dominate – I hereby instruct and issue a direct order to the current President (Barack Hussein Obama) to cease and desist using these two expressions, since he has proven he  hasn’t the slightest F’ng idea of what they actually mean.   
He is ignorant of factual American History and is committed to obviating The Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Further, he doesn’t know what he doesn’t know and hasn’t the least interest in preserving the traditions of Liberty and personal freedoms that was the driving force behind the bold and courageous actions of the Founding Fathers who fought the British to establish those freedoms in the original 13 colonies.
Obama is committed to bringing about the tyrannical influence of radical, militant, Islamist ideology in this nation and that is the diametric opposite of ‘Who we are’.  When a president goes rogue and takes such obvious joy in mocking all the sacred bastions of independence and denigrating the freedoms for which so many of our fellow citizens have fought and died, he has forfeited any legitimate authority to direct the future of this nation.  Obama is who he is for sure but, he is for sure, no part of ‘Who we are’.

              MORT KUFF  © 7-9-2016

Bookmark and Share