View all posts filed under 'corruption'

Obama’s Past And Why No One Will Question It.

Friday, 8. April 2011 7:16

Intellectual Dishonesty: “When the truth is too unpleasant, a natural tendency is to refuse to believe it.”

No matter how clear the evidence is, people can always find an interpretation that will allow them to cling to what they want to believe.

Such is the case with our President. If a truly unbiased man were to stand back and take an objective look at Barack Obama- his past, his policies, his lies, his deceptions, and his agenda, he would simply declare that Obama was- and continues to be – a fraud and a socialist.

It’s perfectly clear.

The problem has never been that we can’t find evidence that Obama is living a big lie, it’s that people don’t want to believe it.

The are being intellectually dishonest.

How do we know? Because if George Bush or Sarah Palin had refused to give up all records of their past, including a simple birth certificate, these same folks would be screaming from the heavens. Imagine if Palin refused to show us her college records, her college thesis, her health records, or her passport. Imagine if she had used multiple social security numbers throughout her life and now used one that had been issued in the early 1980′s out of Connecticut- at a time when she had never even visited Connecticut.

Imagine if she had surrounded herself with radicals throughout her life, people who talked of revolution, people who hated this country and actually planted bombs at government buildings in Washington. Imagine if she had attended a church for 20 years where a reverend spewed hatred toward America and, more specifically, toward the Jews…..

Imagine the liberals ignoring these things if they pertained to Palin.

Yet when American citizens ask a few logical questions about Obama’s past and his qualifications for the highest office in our land, they are labeled “birthers” by both the political Left and Right. Somehow, just asking the question makes people squirm. Why?

Because we want to believe that he’s telling us the truth. If Obama is lying about the circumstances of his birth, then his entire house of cards begins to crumble. Suddenly, we will have to question the truth behind everything this man says and does.

We will have to admit that we elected a “fraud”, a “con-man” into the White House. We have to admit our own stupidity.

Journalists, especially, don’t like to be wrong. Notice how their stories make headlines, but their retractions are buried on the bottom of page 4A. These folks want to give us the impression that they’ve “done their homework”, probing for facts and researching into the wee hours of the night, when the exact opposite is usually true.

Most journalists take the easy way out when it comes to writing about people they like, they simply regurgitate what they’ve been told.

In the case of Obama, they’ve been told a lie.

So what IS the truth? Well, we don’t know for sure. We know that Obama claims he was born in Hawaii, that Barack Obama Sr. was his father, and that his father abandoned him when he was 2. All of these facts remain questionable. I’ll get into these theories at another time, but suffice it to say, there is new evidence that suggests Obama has manufactured much of this.

Obama claims he attended Columbia University from Sept. 1981 to May 1983, yet an investigation by Orly Taitz- the leading lawyer on the birth certificate controversy- has shown otherwise. When she accessed the Clearinghouse records on Obama’s attendance at Columbia, here’s what she found:

Look at the dates on the last line: “09/01/1982 to 05/31/1983.”

He told us he attended in 1981.

Why does this matter? Well, it was leaked by an FBI informant that Obama had spent time in Pakistan in 1981. Once this became news, Obama came clean, claiming that he made a stop in Pakistan to visit friends on his way back from Indonesia where he had visited his mother in the summer of 1981.

Here’s the problem. It was nearly impossible for an American to travel into Pakistan with an American passport at that time. Did Obama get special treatment? Also, there are no records showing that he ever went to Indonesia. There is even speculation that he spent an entire year in Pakistan, not the few weeks he has stated.

One more thing that you might need to know: Obama’s Pakistani friends have admitted to their Marxist/communist ideologies during the years they spent at Occidental College with Obama.

Barack’s passport has been off-limits to us.

The college dates- Sept. 1982 to May 1983- on the above document seem to coincide with the theory that he wasn’t at Columbia during 1981. Where was he? Who financed this trip?


Lots of unanswered questions about this man we call “the leader of the free world.”

We also have the issue of Obama’s Connecticut Social Security number. This controversy has the ability to be bigger and more damaging to Obama than the birth certificate controversy. Attorney, Orly Taitz, has been investigating…. Here’s part of the scoop, according to WND:

Both Daniels and Sampson [investigators working with Taitz] state that in the 1980s, Obama assumed as his own a Social Security number that had been applied for in Connecticut and was issued by the Social Security Administration between the years 1976 and 1977.

Sampson, a retired senior investigator with the Department of Homeland Security, provided in his affidavit an expert opinion that there is no reasonable explanation for a person residing in Hawaii to get a Social Security number issued in Connecticut.

The affidavits of the private investigators indicates Obama is using a fraudulent Social Security number,” she [Taitz} said, “so I am requesting information from the Social Security Administration that would help us track down the Connecticut-issued number Obama is using as well as the multiple Social Security numbers that show up for Obama in the private investigator databases.

Daniels, in a previous interview with WND, said the Social Security Administration never re-issues Social Security numbers.

“A person who wants to hide their true identity often picks up the Social Security number of a deceased person, thinking that nobody would ever look into it,” Daniels said. “I think it was sometime in the 1980s that Obama decided to hide who he really is.”

And sure enough, Obama’s SS number HAD been held previously by someone, an elderly person born in 1890 who had lived in Connecticut.

So let’s see, Obama has used MULTIPLE Social Security numbers and is currently using a “recycled” number from a dead guy in Connecticut? This, if proven, is Social Security fraud.

Another tid-bit: We know that Barack worked at a Baskin Robbins in Hawaii in 1975- yet this SS number wasn’t issued until after that time. What SS number did he use during the time he scooped up ice cream?

No one knows.


Here’s the truth. Even if the mainstream media had done more of their homework before the 2008 elections, most Americans were not ready to believe that Barack Obama was a con-man. He was “the Messiah”, a “Prophet”, and the “One we are waiting for”. He offered us “transparency”, “hope”, and “change.” He promised to eliminate racism, eliminate poverty, eliminate discrimination.

Like all good communists, he told us what we wanted to hear.

Some of us could see through it, simply because we actually DID our homework. The majority of people, even when presented with the facts, were – AND STILL ARE- in a state of intellectual dishonesty.

Some things are simply too hard to believe.

An enemy from within? Impossible.

Yet, sadly probable.

go to Home Page

Category:Obama, communism, corruption, lsm, media, political, socialism | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Did The DOJ Encourage The Sale Of Guns To Drug Cartels?

Sunday, 27. March 2011 16:51

Project Gunrunner began in 2005 as a pilot project in Laredo, Texas by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). It’s original intent was to stop the flow of drugs and firearms across the border and in the process, control the level of violence by depriving the Mexican drug cartels of weapons.

The mission of this project has apparently “changed.”

You see, like all well-intended government programs left in the hands of bureaucrats, Project Gunrunner is now embedded in a web of controversy. There are allegations that since February 2008, one of the operations within Project Gunrunner- “Fast and Furious”- has been involved in what appears to be a huge scandal, one that has gone unreported by most of the mainstream media- with the exception of CBS News.

Here’s what you need to know….

According to sources within the government bureau, ATF has permitted and facilitated the “straw purchase” of firearms by drug cartels, allowing and encouraging these traffickers to transport them from the United States into Mexico.

Our government is allowing guns to be sold to members of drug cartels? Our government is encouraging these guns to be transferred across the border into Mexico?

Apparently so.

A few agents within the ATF -using the “Whistleblower Act” to grant them immunity from prosecution- are now coming forward to tell their story. CBS News broke this story when they were able to speak to six veteran ATF agents and some of the executives involved. The agents asked to remain anonymous because they fear retaliation. Here’s what they had to say (emphasis mine):

In late 2009, ATF was alerted to suspicious buys at seven gun shops in the Phoenix area. Suspicious because the buyers paid cash, sometimes brought in paper bags. And they purchased classic “weapons of choice” used by Mexican drug traffickers – semi-automatic versions of military type rifles and pistols.

Sources tell CBS News several gun shops wanted to stop the questionable sales, but ATF encouraged them to continue.

Jaime Avila was one of the suspicious buyers. ATF put him in its suspect database in January of 2010. For the next year, ATF watched as Avila and other suspects bought huge quantities of weapons supposedly for “personal use.” They included 575 AK-47 type semi-automatic rifles.

ATF managers allegedly made a controversial decision: allow most of the weapons on the streets. The idea, they said, was to gather intelligence and see where the guns ended up. Insiders say it’s a dangerous tactic called letting the guns, “walk.”

An important part of this story lies in the fact that as of January, 2003, the ATF has been under the control of the Department of Justice.

Yup folks, Eric Holder, our Attorney General is in the middle of this controversy.

This is the same attorney general who has instructed his department to ignore the intimidation of the Black Panthers toward voters on election day, the same attorney general who instructed his department to ignore all “black on white” voting complaints, the same attorney general who has unlawfully decided to no longer enforce certain provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act, the same attorney general who, in 2008, “urged” the Supreme Court to uphold Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban.

The same attorney general who challenged Arizona’s controversial immigration law in court, stating that it is “preempted” by federal law- but refuses to enforce that federal law.

That guy.

So our Department of Justice ALLOWED and encouraged gun shops to sell guns to drug traffickers so they could “follow” them and “gather intelligence”?


Two of these assault rifles were found next to the body of American border agent, Brian Terry when he was slaughtered in Mexico last December. The serial numbers on the rifles matched those of the guns which were sold to Jaime Avila. We’ve yet to hear from the Justice Department whether or not a bullet from one of these rifles actually killed Terry. Avila and some of his buddies have now been arrested, yet none have been charged with the murder.

There’s more. CBS also reports this:

On the phone, one Project Gunrunner source (who didn’t want to be identified) told us just how many guns flooded the black market under ATF’s watchful eye. “The numbers are over 2,500 on that case by the way. That’s how many guns were sold – including some 50-calibers they let walk.”

50-caliber weapons are fearsome. For months, ATF agents followed 50-caliber Barrett rifles and other guns believed headed for the Mexican border, but were ordered to let them go. One distraught agent was often overheard on ATF radios begging and pleading to be allowed to intercept transports. The answer: “Negative. Stand down.”

CBS News has been told at least 11 ATF agents and senior managers voiced fierce opposition to the strategy. “It got ugly…” said one. There was “screaming and yelling” says another. A third warned: “this is crazy, somebody is gonna to get killed.”


In December, 2010, before this scandal broke and just a few days before the death of Brian Terry, the Washington Post accused one of the gun store outlets in Houston, Carter’s Country, of illegally selling guns to members of the drug cartels. The next day, Carter Country’s lawyer, Texas criminal defense attorney, Dick Deguerin, took the story to task, airing what appears to be the truth:

“Let me tell you something about Carter’s Country. They have been co-operating with ATF from the get go.” Deguerin says the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms asked Carter’s Country to complete transactions, even when sales people strongly suspected the weapons were headed to Mexican drug gangs. “They were told to go through with what they considered to be questionable sales. They were told to go through with sales of three or more assault rifles at the same time or five or more 9 millimeter guns at the same time or a young Hispanic male paying in cash. It’s all profiling, but they went through with it,” said Deguerin.

Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa was alerted to this Gunrunner scandal shortly thereafter. He initiated an investigation by sending a letter to ATF on January 27, 2011, and again on January 31, 2011.

ATF denied all allegations. Grassley, not content with their reply, then responded with documentation supporting his allegations directly to Eric Holder on Feb. 9 and again in Feb. 16, 2011. A formal briefing of ATF was called by Grassley on Feb. 10. ATF refused to answer anything specific about the actions in question.


There are now five separate but connected accusations against ATF and DOJ officials in what has been dubbed “Project Gunwalker“:

First, that they intentionally allowed to perhaps as many as 3,000 firearms “walked” across the U.S. border into Mexico.

Second, that they instructed U.S. gun dealers to proceed with questionable and illegal sales of firearms to suspected gunrunners.

Third, that they intentionally withheld information about U.S.-sanctioned gun smuggling from the Mexican government.

Fourth, that one of the guns ATF allowed or helped to be smuggled into Mexico was involved in the death of CBP Agent Brian Terry.

Fifth, that they are, now in tandem with the FBI, involved in covering up all ATF and DOJ culpability.

When questioned about the actions of ATF during a Senate Appropriations Committee last week, Eric Holder boldly stated that “letting guns ‘walk’ is not something that is acceptable,” adding that “Guns are different than drugs or money when we are trying to follow their trail. That is not acceptable.

I guess we should be thankful that he knows the difference between right and wrong. Sometimes it’s hard to tell…

Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Security and the woman in charge of our border, denied any knowledge of this scandal.

Barack Obama also denied knowledge, claiming that the U.S. has “a pretty big government” with “a lot of moving parts”. Funny, but he also “didn’t know” Van Jones was a communist, Wright was preaching anti-Americanism, Ayers was a domestic terrorist, or that his aunt was illegally in this country.

Yes folks, the “smartest president in history” is once again left in the dark.

Coincidentally, after the Tucson shooting of Rep. Giffords, Obama DID mention that with all the violence on the border, we might need to tighten up the Second Amendment just a bit- because it seems that guns, especially assault rifles, are GETTING INTO THE HANDS OF CRIMINALS.

He failed to mention that the DOJ was compliant in this activity.

Meanwhile, Obama and his buddy, Cass Sunstein are concocting a plan that will limit the sale of guns to Americans, putting more constraints on the Second Amendment.

Our President creates the problem and then legislates a way to fix it.

And along the way, he steals our God-given rights.

Beautiful, just beautiful.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, corruption, gun control, illegal immigration, lsm, redistribution of wealth | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Barack’s Associations “Come Home To Roost”.

Monday, 28. February 2011 18:13

As the puzzle pieces are beginning to fit together, the picture is slowly emerging.

Oh my.

There was a reason that Barack Obama wasn’t fully vetted. There was a reason that the mainstream media didn’t delve into the past associations of our president. There was a reason that Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezco, Khalid Al Mansour, Rashid Khalidi, and Frank Marshall Davis were all dismissed as mere “acquaintances”, not major factors in our president’s life.

Any qualified researcher who looked into this man’s past would have been quaking in their liberal boots. The folks with whom Barack Obama has associated are not your ordinary, friendly neighborhood types. They are thugs, communists, and radicals with tremendous amounts of power and influential friends in very high places.

These are people who you don’t want to mess with.

We are finally beginning to understand why Barack has supported Iran, turned his back on Israel, dissed England and France, and called for Mubarak to step down. It’s becoming clear why it took Obama 9 days to address the Libyan situation, and even then, he never mentioned Gadhafi’s name once. After 2 weeks of watching Gadhafi slay thousands of his own people, Obama is finally calling on this man to step down- yet he’s allowing a White House spokesman and Hillary Clinton to do most of the talking. It’s almost as if Obama doesn’t want to be caught on tape criticizing this nasty dictator.

Doesn’t make sense, does it?

Thanks to, we are getting some of the answers. We’ve recently learned that Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the pastor who was a mentor and spiritual adviser to Barack Obama for over 20 years– and is the man who not only married Barack and Michelle, but also baptized their daughters-- has ties to Colonel Moammar Gadhafi, the evil dictator of Libya. Wright and his good friend, Louis Farrakhan- the leader of the Nation of Islam- visited Gadhafi in 1984, just a couple of years before Barack began to hang out in Wright’s church. It seems that Farrakhan and Gadhafi have had many cozy visits.

So when Obama selected Wright as his “mentor” (Barack’s words, not mine), Wright was already buddies with Farrakhan. Did Obama know? Well, Farrakhan made many guest appearances at Wright’s church over the years and it has been reported that Wright and Obama attended Farrakhan’s Million Man March in Washington.

Hmm….I wonder if Obama sat in the pew of Wright’s church on the days that Farrakhan spoke….or did he miss those days, too?

Farrakhan received a $5 Million interest-free loan from his friend, Gadhafi. He was also given a coveted award by the Libyan dictator in 1996– “The Gadhafi Human Rights Award”.

In 2007, Reverend Wright gave Farrakhan an “Empowerment Award” at his church. Remember that in 2007, Obama was still a member of Wright’s church.

Let’s see….Wright and Farrakhan were awfully chummy…..and Wright and Obama were also awfully chummy… and Farrakhan and Gadhafi were also chummy. Oh, and did I mention that at the G8 Summit in 2009, Obama gave Gadhafi a two-handed handshake instead of the “normal” single handed one?


In a 2010 speech, Louis Farrakhan spoke to a group of followers:

“You don’t know how much our Muslim world is anxious to see the enemy handcuffed. …the enemy – the British and the Americans have created all of that havoc in the Islamic world. And imagine us rising up in America at a time when there’s no superpower to deal with us and God with us – is the power that’s gonna deal with America.”

Oh, and in that same speech, he also declared that “The cracker don’t have no authority over me”.

Reverend Wright expressed his own thoughts on the white race: “Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people…”

I get the feeling that Farrakhan and Wright don’t exactly like white people, don’t you?

So why is Obama hanging with these two?

After all, Obama was raised by his white grandmother, the one he called a “typical white woman”…….

According to Western intelligence, Gadhafi is responsible for some of the deadliest terrorist attacks in the mid-80s, including the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270- most of them Americans. Gadafhi praised the British government when Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, the only person convicted in the bombing, was released.

Obama is giving a two-handed handshake to a man responsible for the death of 270 Americans?

That’s simply shameful.

Obama didn’t denounce Wright until he had to, until political pressure forced his hand. He’s never said anything defamatory about Farrakhan. And you almost get the feeling that Obama wants nothing to do with denouncing Gadhafi, either. He’s using the U.N., using Hillary Clinton, using our allies in Europe to do the dirty work.

He’s busy hosting MoTown parties in the White House.

Farrakhan spoke on Sunday to a group of Nation of Islam supporters:

Nation of Islam leader Minister Louis Farrakhan predicted on Sunday that America faces imminent uprisings that mirror those in the Middle East.

“What you are looking at in Tunisia, in Egypt … Libya, in Bahrain … what you see happening there … you’d better prepare because it will be coming to your door,” Farrakhan said in a booming voice, thousands of followers cheering in his wake.

Farrakhan also called on President Barack Obama to allow protesters to march, urging the president not to attack innocent people when they do.

The puzzle pieces are all starting to fit, aren’t they? The reason that Reverend Wright and his Black Liberation Theology was an important issue in the 2008 campaign is because of Obama’s associations with Wright, Farrakhan, and Gadhafi. It’s because when our president has “friends” who denounce Israel, we need to know. It’s because when our president has “friends” who call America “the enemy”, we have a right to know. It’s because when our president has “friends” who have “friends” that have blown up an American airline, the voting public has the right to know.

The question remains: Why has Obama chosen these men to associate with and why is it so hard for him to distance himself from them?

There’s so much more. We’ve barely scratched the surface.

Stay tuned. More puzzle pieces to come.


Category:Islam, Obama, corruption, lsm, religious, socialism | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Rahm And Chicago: A Perfect Pair.

Thursday, 16. December 2010 8:07

So our friend, Rahm Emanuel, wants to be the mayor of Chicago….

Looks like he’s off to a good start- after all, there is really only one requirement needed to be the leader of the “Windy City”- You have to be a slimeball.

No one is slimier than Rahm.

It seems that Rahm is trying to convince a Board of Elections that he’s been a full time resident of Chicago for the past year, the minimal requirement needed to seek the job of mayor. He’s gone back and “fixed” his 2009 IRS statement, the one that originally stated that he was a “part-time” resident. He’s now claiming that although he’d rented his Chicago house out to someone else, moved his family to DC, enrolled his kids in DC schools, and is on video standing by the President’s side on a daily basis, he was actually living in Chicago.


And what does he base this on? Well, he says that he never moved personal items, things like the clothes his children wore home from the hospital and a coat that has been passed down in the family….

So that makes him a resident. End of story.

OK, there’s more. Ben Labolt, Emanuel’s spokesman, claims that Rahm retained his residency because he “intended to return to Chicago once his service to President Obama was complete.”

Hey, many of us “intend” to move back to our home state once our current job is over. How in the world does this qualify as an argument?

He says that Rahm paid property taxes in Chicago, maintained car and voter registration in Chicago, and continued to pay income taxes in Chicago in 2010.

If Rahm owned property in Chicago, then of course he paid property taxes on it. The point is that he didn’t live at the property- he had no intention of living at the property. HE RENTED IT OUT. And is anyone surprised that Rahm maintained voter registration in Chicago? I would love to see where he actually voted in 2010- in Chicago, in Washington DC….. or both?

I suppose Rahm’s double voting would be a bonus in the eyes of most Chicago voters- he might be able to use it as a campaign slogan.

Here’s my question: If Rahm was paying personal taxes ONLY in Illinois and not in DC, then why? A friend of mine works in 2 states and must prove each year that he spends more time in Texas (where his residence is) than he does in Minnesota in order to qualify to be a Texas resident. The IRS has come after him, making him show day to day proof that the majority of his year was spent in his “home” state. This entails going through daily receipts, airline tickets, and agenda books to prove conclusively his where-abouts.

All we have to do is look at the President’s calendar to see where Rahm has been.

It hasn’t been Chicago.

Why do I get the feeling that the rules that apply to other candidates will suddenly be changed for Rahm? Why do I think that the Chicago Board of Elections will rule that Rahm was “working for the President”- the commander in chief- and that his resident status in Illinois can be retained because he was working for the military- the one exception to the rule? Or maybe they’ll just rule that he was “serving” at the request of the President, but never left Chicago in his heart.….

Anything is possible with this group.

You see, these political slugs who come out of Chicago -many of whom we now call our “leaders”- don’t play by the rules. Last I looked, Rod Blagojevich- the governor of Illinois who tried to sell a Senate seat- is still a free man. Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. was one of those touted to become the next Senator, and while he denied any wrongdoing, it was reported that Jackson was the man Blago called “Senate Candidate #5,” a man who offered to pay up to a million dollars in exchange for the appointment. He will never be questioned.

The husband of crooked Illinois congresswoman, Jan Schakowsky, a guy named Robert Creamer, wrote most of the current Health Care Law while sitting in jail, serving time for bank fraud involving multiple check-kiting schemes which led several banks to experience shortfalls of at least $2.3 million. Jan was also mentioned for the Senate appointment.

The list goes on and on…..

Rahm is being challenged and interrogated by a group of folks who don’t want him to run because they’d rather see their own crooked friends become mayor. Those who have watched the hearings say that Rahm doesn’t appear very happy at some of the questions he’s been asked during his 12 hour testimony. He appeared to get quieter and quieter as the hours went on.

Like the calm before the storm.

I wouldn’t trade shoes with those interrogators if Rahm gets into power.

Which, of course, is a very real possibility. It takes guts to sit before an Election Board and keep a straight face while you convince them that you’ve lived in a house that is currently rented to others. Whether it’s money or a payoff of some other kind, Rahm has probably already “gotten to” some of the members of this Board. The hearings are a mere sham, a formality to convince the public that Rahm is credible, that he is legit.

Which couldn’t be further from the truth.

Can’t the citizens of Chicago see that in order to clean up their city- and their city’s corrupt reputation- they need to stay far away from guys like Rahm? Are the voters so uneducated, so “name-conscious”, and so dependent on the government that they will vote for a guy like Rahm, simply because they know his name?

The sad answer is yes.

The very sad answer is yes.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Uncategorized, corruption, lsm, political | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Cover-ups, Cover-ups Everywhere.

Monday, 22. November 2010 8:33

Remember the phantom “missile” that soared through the skies 30 miles off the coast of Los Angeles a couple of weeks ago?

NASA was mum. The military was mum. After a few days, the Defense Department assured us that this was a simple contrail from an airplane- nothing to worry about. Yet listen to military experts who know a thing or two about aircraft and you’ll hear a completely different story. This contrail, according to these guys, couldn’t come from an airplane because of the location, size, and shape of it. It most definitely came from a missile, probably one from a foreign country because of the color.

The color?

You see, the United States takes precautions to ensure our missiles have clean, white contrails, and this plume was loaded with dirt, giving it a brown/black hue. It seems that the most likely culprit is China, a country which just may have been sending the United States a message… possibly a message about the way we’re spending their money.

So who gave the orders to lie to the American people?

According to WND: Dr. Lyle J. Rapacki of Sentinel Intelligence Services, LLC, states “the decision to officially announce that North America was not threatened and all the excitement was due to an aircraft leaving a contrail is a decision that reaches beyond the four-star general level and goes directly to a decision made by the commander-in-chief.

Commander in Chief? Huh.

This missile incident made me think of a story my husband told me back in the late 1990′s. He had just returned from a golf outing with a high-ranking (really high) TWA executive, a man who was privy to the happenings within the company. My husband told me that this executive looked him in the eye and stated unequivocally that TWA flight 800, the one that blew up over the coast of Long Island in July, 1996 and killed 230 people was brought down by a missile.

It did not explode from an electrical problem, as we were told.

Did the government lie to us back then, too?

Bingo. It seems that our government didn’t only lie, top officials covered up, distorted, and fabricated evidence to support their lie. I know these two “missile stories” are completely different, but the level of deceit involved in each reaches all the way to the Oval Office and should make us pause….

Jack Cashill has done an enormous amount of research on what happened to TWA flight 800 and interestingly enough, his findings mirror those of the TWA executive who spoke to my husband. His discoveries found evidence of a cover-up that is even darker and more twisted than any of us could imagine….

Let’s go back to July, 1996. Elections were coming up for President Clinton in just a couple of months and it seemed as though he would cruise to an easy victory if nothing went wrong. The last thing he or Hillary needed was a devastating airplane accident, especially one that involved either friendly or enemy fire. It was much better to let the public believe that this was simply an electrical accident.

From the beginning, the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) felt as though a criminal act had occurred. There were 270 eyewitnesses who went to the FBI with claims of seeing a missile attack on the plane. Some took still photos, others had video. A few of the eyewitnesses were aviation experts who wouldn’t mistake a missile strike for a plume of smoke.

Almost immediately, President Clinton asked a woman by the name of Jamie Gorelick to take over the investigation of the accident. Gorelick was the Deputy Attorney General and had no experience in either aviation or conducting an investigation. The first thing she did was to take power from the NTSB and give the investigation to the FBI- a group who reported directly to her.

Although this was illegal, no one seemed to notice.

Clinton knew full-well that the FBI was inept when it came to plane accidents. The NTSB were the experts.

Which is exactly why Clinton and Gorelick wanted the NTSB out of the equation. It’s much easier to stage a cover-up with inept accomplices.

Oh, it gets better. Gorelick’s second scheme involved the media. She deliberately took news coverage away from every news outlet except the New York Times, claiming it was easier to deal with just one entity. The FBI was only allowed to feed information to the NY Times, essentially controlling the “propaganda” to an easily-controlled and sympathetic source.

Of the 270 eyewitnesses to the incident who had come forward, the NY Times interviewed …

Americans never heard the tales of these eyewitnesses.

After a 4 year “investigation” , the FBI declared that the plane had experienced an explosion in the fuel tank caused by a short circuit. The case was essentially closed.

Yet, the evidence didn’t match the final report. For example, the fuel in the airplane is inflammable. Tests done on similar fuel show that even lighting a match to the fuel will not cause it to start on fire. A simple short circuit couldn’t possibly have exploded the fuel. Also, the explosion would have caused the airplane to have exploded from the inside-out, yet the damaged wreckage clearly showed signs that the damage came from the outside-in. (indicating a missile strike). There was even evidence that the wreckage was physically altered to match the story concocted by Gorelick and Clinton.

Again, no one seemed to care.

There’s an interesting epilogue to this story: In May, 1997, Jamie Gorelick was selected to be the new Vice Chair of the Fannie Mae Board, although she didn’t have a lick of experience. She was given a paycheck of $4 Million per year for the next 6 years.

And no one asked why.

Oh, that’s not all. After September 11th, she resigned from Fannie to take one of five Democratic seats on the 9-11 Commission. Jack Cashill believes that she was “selected” for this position to keep any talk of TWA flight 800 at bay and so that no one tried to reopen up that investigation.

The cover-up remained hush-hush.

One more note of interest: Just to be sure that no one would ever connect the dots, Sandy Berger, Bill Clinton’s National Security Adviser, was sent to steal a few documents from the National Archives before he testified in front of the 9/11 commission. He stuffed his socks and loaded his pants with classified papers, which were later reported to only be “copies” of documents.


This was all done in an effort to cover Clinton’s ass.

How many other stories have been spoon-fed to the American people? Who ordered Air Force One to do a photo shoot over NYC? Who ordered a delay to the clean up of the BP oil spill? Who ordered the Justice Department to stop the investigation of the New Black Panthers? Who hired Van Jones and did they know he was a communist? Who signed off on the release of the Lockerbie bomber? …And was there a missile launched off the coast of Los Angeles by a foreign country?….

Are we allowing the government to cover Obama’s ass, too?

How many times have we been taken for fools?

Too many times to count, folks, too many times to count.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Uncategorized, corruption, ethics, lsm, media | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

More Proof that Saul Alinsky Has Infiltrated the Church

Wednesday, 18. August 2010 7:20

I’ve written about the link between the Catholic Church and Saul Alinsky in the past, and while it is uncomfortable for Catholics, like myself, to hear the truth, the only way to get to the bottom of this corruption is by making it public and demanding that this behavior be stopped. When I saw this video, I realized that the corruption goes even deeper than I knew.

I went to my own priest with this information and was greeted with a stone wall- He didn’t want to hear any of it. He pleaded ignorance, but more importantly, he refused to “look into” my facts, instead questioning my sources and denying my claims. I believe that in a way, this scandal is as big (although not as immoral) as the priest abuse scandal. The idea that our Church has been stealing money from the parishoners in the name of “helping the poor” and then using it to fund organizations which promote Saul Alinsky and his radical ideology is beyond belief.

Please pass these videos on to your Catholic friends or take them to your own priest and demand that this be stopped.

Go to Home Page:

Category:corruption, lsm, religious | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Another Criminal In The White House

Friday, 30. July 2010 8:52

Another first for our fine President.

No, not his appearance on daytime TV. Much, much bigger than that. He’s the first president who has boasted about the outstanding job he’s done with our economy by asking three unemployed workers to stand behind him in a Rose Garden speech- a speech about the importance of giving these poor souls more unemployment because they can’t find jobs in this economy.

“Audacity” really is this guy’s middle name.

Let’s talk about that day. Obama was pushing for extended unemployment benefits for unemployed workers who are actively looking for work but can’t find it. The $800 Billion Stimulus plan was supposed to put these folks back to work- It was going to create enough jobs to keep the unemployment rate below 8%. It was the solution to the horrible economy that Obama “inherited from Bush.”

No one seems to mention that the “horrible economy” was actually caused from Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and their ingenius plan to get low income folks into houses they couldn’t afford.

Hey, did I mention that these two idiots wrote the recently passed Financial Reform Law?

You can’t make this stuff up.

Needless to say, the Stimulus plan was a waste of money. Oh, we saved a couple of turtles when we built the million dollar turtle pass and we sent a few kids on school vacation in Georgia. We sent money to nonexistent congressional districts and fabricated zip codes to employ nonexistent workers. We “saved” a bunch of jobs, we just didn’t create any.

OK, so back to the Rose Garden and the “job creating or saving or fabricating” President. He introduced his three unemployed guests, giving a brief history of their job woes and explaining that we need to help these folks out by extending their benefits until they can find work. One of the people who the White House hand-picked to profile was a woman named Leslie Macko, a woman who had lost her job at a fitness spa, was only receiving short-term unemployment benefits, and in the President’s words, “She’s doing what she never thought she’d have to do. Not at this point, anyway. She’s turning to her father for financial support.”

Obama wants her to turn to us instead. Poor daddy is done raising his daughter- it’s our turn.

Well, well, well. As with all good stories, this one has an interesting ending. You see, Leslie Macko is a criminal. Yes folks, she’s not just an unemployed worker, she’s an unemployed worker with a criminal past. She was convicted of prescription drug fraud- and one month later lost her job. But wait, there’s more….

It seems that Leslie has been in trouble with the law before. She was indicted on grand larceny in 2007- a charge which was changed to petit larceny in court- and she was given 2 years of probation.

Of all the dumb luck.…can you believe that our President would pick THIS woman as a poster child for help?….

Wait a minute. Shouldn’t the Secret Service have known about this woman’s past? Wouldn’t they do a backround check on a person who would be shoulder to shoulder with the president? Did another criminal scam her way into the White House without the vetting of the president’s security team?

It brings back memories of the woman in the red dress who came to one of Obama’s parties. Oh, and Robert Creamer, the guy from Illinois who had recently been jailed, wrote parts of the Health care bill while in jail, and also attended the party.

It seems as though the Secret Service, just like all government officials, are incapable of doing their job. Maybe instead of “vetting the unemployed”, they were over at the SEC watching porn on the computers. Maybe they were given instructions by Eric Holder that we are now allowing criminals into the White House- in anticipation of the Black Panther party that Obama is sure to hold right after the elections.

When asked about Ms. Macko’s criminal past, Robert Gibbs assured us that, “Had that type of information been made available, she would not have participated in the event here.”

Whew. Good to know.

But wait. FOX News wrote a letter to the Secret Service, asking them about this breach of security. This is how they responded: “We do not comment or confirm the existence of anyone’s criminal history or lack thereof. Anyone who is granted access to the White House or any venue that we protect does so only after an assessment of dangerousness is made.”

So they KNEW she had a criminal history, but they didn’t find her dangerous?

The vetting probably only consisted of a single question: “Are you a member of the Tea Party?” When she denied involvement with that “terrorist” group, they knew she was safe.

Are you telling me that they couldn’t find another unemployed person who didn’t have a criminal record that could have stood behind the president as a testament to his ineffective job creation plan? Leslie Macko was the only one who fit the bill?

Maybe they thought she’d feel right at home with Van Jones, Anita Dunn, Tim Geithner, Carol Browner, Cass Sunstein, and the rest of the communists/socialists/tax evaders who work with our president.

Insanity. It’s all insanity. Every day I wake up, read the news, and scratch my head. Nothing makes sense anymore.

We deserve better.

The American people deserve better.

Waking up yet?


Category:Obama, corruption, lsm, socialism | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

The Lockerbie Bomber For Oil….?

Wednesday, 21. July 2010 8:32

I thought we were done with the Lockerbie terrorist story.

The man who was found guilty of bombing Pan Am Flight 103 loaded with Americans was released by Scotland last August. He was going to die within 3 months and was taken back to his home country of Libya to spend his final days. End of story…right?

Evidently not. You see, Abdel Basset al-Megrahi still lives today, almost a year later. His doctors now say that he could live for another 10 years, that his prostate cancer no longer appears to be life-threatening.


OK, let’s revisit what we were told back in August, 2009 when the Scottish government released al-Megrahi. We were told that releasing this terrorist was protocol because their constitution calls for “compassion” toward inmates who are dying. To prove that his death was imminent, Al-Megrahi appeared in front of the press in a wheelchair, so weak that he couldn’t speak, violently coughing, and wearing a mask to keep his weakened body from exposure to germs. An IV drip was attached to his arm.

Liberals all over the world felt compassion for this man.

The rest of us knew better.

Our conservative common sense was affirmed when we saw the homecoming for this terrorist in Libya. Al-Megrahi boarded a flight in Glasgow dressed in a white sweatsuit, scarf over his face, and arrived on the tarmac in Libya looking like a man who had found the fountain of youth aboard the flight. He emerged from the plane with Colonel Gaddafi’s son, Saif, dressed in a grey suit and waving madly to the crowd below.

Quick recovery.

7 months after his release, Colonel Gaddafi’s son gave us an update. It seemed that al-Megrahi’s condition had improved. He also dropped a little bombshell, one which I imagine was not supposed to see the light of day. Saif told us that al-Megrahi’s release had been negotiated during trade talks with Britain- talks which included lucrative oil deals. We’ve now come to find out that BP, yes the same BP who trashed our Gulf coast in a catastrophic oil spill, may have been involved in the release of this Lockerbie terrorist.


You see, there was a $900 million exploration agreement on the table between BP and Libya. Libya wanted the release of “terrorists” to be included in the deal. BP denies that al-Megrahi was included in the negotiations, but Saif told the Middle East News that Megrahi’s release was, indeed, linked to trade deals with Britain. “In all commercial contracts, for oil and gas with Britain, (Megrahi) was always on the negotiating table.”

Prime Minister Gordon Brown, on the other hand, denied that Megrahi’s release was linked to Britain’s interest in Libya’s oil and gas reserves.

So who should we believe? Brown or Gaddafi?

The San Francisco Chronicle reported that “BP previously owned up to urging the British government to sign a prisoner release agreement with rogue-state Libya, where a $900 million oil drilling deal was pending. BP swears it didn’t suggest including Abdel Basset al-Megrahi” in the deal.

“Swears it didn’t suggest….?” Strange wording, isn’t it?

Sounds a bit like “the meaning of ‘is’.”

While most Americans were not aware of an oil deal involved in the release of this terrorist, it is not news to Glenn Johnson, who’s daughter, Beth Ann, was killed in the Lockerbie bombing. He suspected that al-Megrahi wasn’t dying when he was released because he had heard rumblings of the oil contracts between the British and Libyan governments.

“It was just a deal to get oil contracts for the British government,” Johnson said. He said that he suspected that al-Megrahi’s failing health was a cover-up for the $900 million agreement between BP and Libya.” When he heard that Tony Blair had traveled to Libya before leaving office in 2007, he assumed the deal had gone through.

But wait. London insisted again last week there was no evidence linking Megrahi’s release to protecting a lucrative BP oil deal with Libya.

A handful of Senators in Congress are asking for an investigation. Senator Chuck Schumer from New York said BP could be prosecuted under a U.S. law, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, if they are guilty of persuading the British government to release al-Megrahi to seal a lucrative oil deal.

Not that I want to defend BP, but “persuading” is now a crime? Wouldn’t Britain ultimately be responsible for its own actions?

Prime Minister David Cameron – who is visiting US President Barack Obama – said it was a “very bad decision”. The New York Post reports that Prime Minister Cameron of Great Britain was clearly against the release of al-Megrahi from the beginning. “All I know is, as leader of the opposition, I couldn’t have been more clear. I thought the release of al-Megrahi was completely and utterly wrong. I have no idea of what BP did. I’m not responsible for BP.”

Remember, this was done before Prime Minister Cameron, was in power.

Where’s Obama in all of this? When the release of al-Megrahi was first announced, we were told that it “caught him by surprise.” Later we found out that Obama had a prior conversation with Colonel Gaddafi where he made it clear that when the Lockerbie terrorist was released, there was to be no hoopla. He wanted it done in a quiet, private manner.

He knew about it beforehand, yet didn’t stop it.

So BP has more power of “persuasion” with the British government than our President?…….

Coincidentally, we now see that BP is involved in writing our Cap and Trade Bill, the one that will tax energy, promote “green” jobs, and discourage American gas and oil production…..

Something ain’t right. Why is a British oil company writing American law- especially law that appears to hurt them? Why are they able to determine the fate of foreign terrorists? Why do they have this much power?

Americans deserve some answers. The parents and relatives of those who died on Pan Am 103 deserve some justice. The problem is that we can no longer trust our government or our media to tell us the truth.

Look at the facts. Obama didn’t stop the release of al-Megrahi, instead asking Gaddafi to “keep the celebration to a minimum.” He’s pushing a Cap and Trade bill which will tax the energy in this country and also will curb drilling for oil in the U.S. He’s pushing for a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf, an initiative which will force oil rigs to leave this area and find work in foreign countries. He gave 2 Billion tax-payer dollars to Brazil so they could drill for oil in deep water, knowing full-well that the largest financial backer of the dems, George Soros, will benefit greatly- just in time for the 2012 elections.

The dots are starting to connect, but the picture is looking darker and darker.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, corruption, lsm, political | Comments (1) | Author: lsm

The Dems Playbook: How To Steal An Election

Monday, 19. July 2010 7:32

“It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” – Joseph Stalin

So that’s how the democrats plan on winning in 2012…..

Thanks to a recent investigation by the Minnesota Majority, some light has been cast on voter fraud in Minnesota. This organization reviewed the 2008 election records from a few MN. counties and discovered that criminal felons had voted in numbers large enough to skew the Senate race between Coleman and Franken.

So much for good, wholesome, Midwest elections.

Our President is working hard to ensure that convicted felons in ALL 50 states will have this same opportunity to vote. You see, there are about 5.3 million untapped votes out there- the only problem is that they happen to belong to folks who are murders, armed robbers, rapists and other convicts. This is proving to be a huge, potential resource of votes for the democrat party, one they’d like to get their dirty little hands on.

In any way possible.

The key to getting these votes is to first change state laws that prevent felon voting at the state level. This is most easily done by using the argument that these criminals are “disenfranchised voters.”

In the world of liberals, everyone is a victim, even rapists.

“They are people, too.”

This tactic worked in Florida during the 2008 election. With over a million ex-felons (between 250,000 and 500,000 voted) and a new law signed by Charlie Crist allowing them to vote, Florida turned from “Red” to “Blue”, giving Obama a victory by 200,000 votes. Of course, we can’t be sure that the “criminal” vote was the reason for this change, but it certainly didn’t hurt the democrats’ cause.

It also didn’t hurt that Obama ran a registration drive for the criminals in Florida called “YOU CAN VOTE, TOO!!”

He’s pandering to murderers?….

Shockingly, Obama didn’t launch a similar campaign for the military vote…

Iowa restored voting to felons in 2005 and in the past presidential election, the state swung over to the democrat side. The same scenario happened in Colorado, a state which decided in 2007 to allow ex-felons to vote as long as they had completed their parole. True to form, in 2008, Colorado also became a Blue State- the first time in 26 years. Virginia is now legalizing felons and in 2008 became another swing state that went to Obama.


Reinstating the right for criminals to vote state-by-state is a tedious process. The democrats are trying their best to get this done on a national level in one, clean sweep through the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Judge Sonia Sotomayor may help his cause. When Sonia was a Circuit court judge, a case came before her court- Hayden vs Pataki, in which a murderer named Joseph “Jazz” Hayden (he stabbed a sanitation worker to death) became an advocate for letting felons vote. Judge Sotomayor dissented from the majority opinion because she believed that the Voting Rights Act applies to all groups who have been discriminated against, including felons.

We now know how she’ll rule on any case involving the voting rights of illegals, felons, or even dead people.

But there’s more. We heard from Mr. J. Christian Adams, the lawyer who recently quit the Justice Dept. because of the way the Black Panther case was handled. According to the WSJ, “Mr. Adams leveled an even more explosive charge beyond the Panther case. He testified that last year Deputy Assistant Attorney General Julie Fernandes made a jaw-dropping announcement to attorneys in Justice’s Voting Rights section. She said she would not support any enforcement of a key section of the federal “Motor Voter” law — Section 8, which requires states to periodically purge their voter rolls of dead people, felons, illegal voters and those who have moved out of state.

According to Mr. Adams, Justice lawyers were told by Ms. Fernandes: “We’re not interested in those kind of cases. What do they have to do with helping increase minority access and turnout? We want to increase access to the ballot, not limit it.”

So our Justice Department is NOT INTERESTED in purging dead voters, illegals, or felons from elections? Are you kidding me?

Isn’t that the law?

Suddenly, the democrats election landscape of 2012 is becoming very clear, isn’t it? We’re well on our way to allowing millions of convicts to vote, a tactic proven effective in swing states. Add to that the push for amnesty, and the democrats will acquire another voting block of millions. ACORN, while technically disbanded, is reorganizing under various names in every state, making more difficult to trace the corruption because each will appear to be an individual entity. Watch as they are once again able to gain government funding and return to their old tactics.

Oh, and in recent FBI reports, former ACORN employees have now admitted that ACORN Headquarters was indeed working for the democrat party. Yes, folks, our tax dollars were going to an organization that was a champion for the dems.


And then there’s the dead people. If our federal government has indeed issued ORDERS that we will not enforce policies that purge these people from our voting lists, there will be no integrity in our elections. In states like Minnesota, with NO photo ID requirement, anyone can enter a polling place and pretend to be someone who has passed away.

When Barack Obama callously pushes agenda after agenda through our government, most of us shake our heads and wonder how in the world he expects to get elected in 2012 if he continues this behavior.

Now we know. The illegals voting in places like Texas, Utah, and Arizona will have an impact there. The convicts in Minnesota, Florida, Iowa, and others will have an impact there. The dead folks in many states will skew those elections. Add to that the liberal Secretaries of State- along with a Justice Department who turns a blind eye to all of this, including voter intimidation by the Black Panthers- and the dems will have themselves another victory in 2012.

Four more years to push their agenda.

Four more years to “change” our country.

Four more years we cannot afford.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Obama, Uncategorized, amnesty, constitution, corruption, ethics, government policies, lsm, political | Comment (0) | Author: lsm

Convicted Felons May Have Determined Senate Race In Minnesota

Tuesday, 13. July 2010 7:05

Well, well, well- it’s now official. A recent study now shows that there was, indeed, voter fraud in Minnesota during the 2008 elections.

Blow me over with a feather.

The Minnesota Majority, a conservative “watchdog” group, conducted the investigation which concludes that convicted felons were allowed to vote during this past election. The study proves that at least 341 convicted felons in Minneapolis and St. Paul (both heavily democratic) voted illegally in a Senate race which was determined by a mere 312 votes, giving Al Franken a slim victory over Norm Coleman.

Hey, not to worry. Felons always vote Republican, right? I’m sure a bunch of criminals didn’t determine the race…

Interestingly enough, on the same day that Fox News exposed this study, I received an email from my state Senator in Minnesota, democrat Sandy Rummel, on the same subject. I had written to Sandy about the need for Photo ID for voting and this is how she responded:

Thank you for your email. There is no evidence of voter fraud in Minnesota. This issue just came up not too long ago for debate in the newspapers, and again, even conservative members of the courts cannot find any evidence that we have a problem here. This past legislative session there were a number of changes made to election laws in Minnesota. The bipartisan committee that worked on the bill found no need to mandate photo ID. These folks worked all last summer reviewing the evidence. The most noticeable changes made were in the way election judges handle ballots, including absentee ballots.

Sandy Rummel

Huh. It looks like someone needs to get informed.

It also looks like those in the government who had “reviewed the evidence” need to find a new job. They seem to be incompetent.

OK, so how could a simple watchdog group find this fraud when a boat-load of lawyers, all of whom were paid handsomely to conduct the official recount, didn’t find it themselves?

Well, FOX News reports that Dan McGrath, the executive director of Minnesota Majority, was interviewed and asked the same question. According to Dan: “His group was largely ignored when it turned over a list of hundreds of names to prosecutors in two of the state’s largest counties, Ramsey and Hennepin, where fraud seemed to be the greatest.

A spokesman for both county attorneys’ offices belittled the information, saying it was “just plain wrong” and full of errors, which prompted the group to go back and start an in-depth look at the records.”

They compared the voting lists with the conviction lists and then “went back to the records and found the roster lists, where voters sign in before walking to the voting booth.” They matched each name by hand.

“The only way we can be wrong is if someone with the same first, middle and last names, same year of birth as the felon, and living in the same community, has voted. And that isn’t very likely.”

Suddenly, Ramsey County is taking notice.

Such a coincidence, isn’t it? You see, when you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar of corruption, you do everything you can to pretend it’s not in there.

Paul Carruthers of the Ramsey County’s Attorney’s office is taking this matter very seriously. He admits that the Minnesota Majority did a very thorough job and he is in the process of following up on these charges. ” Carruthers said Ramsey County is still investigating all the names and has asked that 15 investigators be hired to complete the process. “So far we have charged 28 people with felonies, have 17 more under review and have 182 cases still open,” he said. “And there is a good chance we may match or even exceed their numbers.” ”

Which means, of course, that there is an even better chance that the wrong man is sitting in Washington and voting away our rights today.

Norm Coleman should demand an explanation from all of the lawyers he paid to help him with the recount. Mark Ritchie, the Minnesota Secretary of State, should have egg all over his face for running such a fraud-laden election- but instead will be praised by George Soros (who financed his election) and all the democrats in Washington for delivering them an important vote in the Senate. Minnesota should be embarrassed that they are a laughingstock of the country when a simple Photo ID would have protected our state from this mess.

And Al Franken should be thanking his lucky stars that this fraud remained covered up for so long. His lone vote has not only helped to determine the Health Care for our country, but could soon undermine our financial system, change our immigration laws, and change our energy policies for years to come.

And to think that much of this could have been avoided if Mark Ritchie had just done his job.

The rest of us in Minnesota should make a vow. Never again.

Mark Ritchie and his right hand man, George Soros, cannot be given the keys to our elections any longer. They can’t be trusted.

November 2. Vote Ritchie out.

Are we Minnesota- or Chicago? Your choice.

Go to Home Page:

Category:Uncategorized, corruption, ethics, government policies, lsm | Comments (1) | Author: lsm