By Jiri and Leni Friedman Valenta

BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 500, June 17, 2017

“…if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain.”
– Sun Tzu

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: “America will not lead from behind. America First does not mean America alone. It is a commitment to protecting and advancing our vital interests…” So wrote President Donald Trump’s NSA, General H.R. McMaster, with Gary Cohn, head of the National Economic Council, in the Wall Street Journal. What follows is a discussion of US leaders’ failed strategies in several wars, Trump’s team of generals, and the emerging Trump doctrine, which is here termed “strategic savvy”.

1964 Vietnam War; “Lies that Led to Vietnam”

Bullet-headed Lt. General H.R. McMaster, the US National Security Adviser, is not just a brave warrior. Like his mentor, General David Petraeus, he is a prominent military intellectual. Both men wrote their PhD dissertations on the lessons of Vietnam. In The American Military and the Lessons of Vietnam, Petraeus concluded, “…significant emphasis should be given to counterinsurgency forces, equipment and doctrine.” McMasters’s thesis, Dereliction of Duty, addressed the roles of LBJ and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara. His subtitle was “Lies that Led to Vietnam.”

On August 4, 1964, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was pushed through Congress authorizing military action against North Vietnam as “vital” to US national interests. It sought to punish Hanoi for an allegedly unprovoked attack by three torpedo boats on a US destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin. In fact, it had not been unprovoked; the US had made repeated prior attacks on the North Vietnamese coast.

The major reason for the American war against North Vietnam, asserts McMaster, was the then-upcoming 1964 presidential election. To Johnson, the prime enemy that summer was not the North Vietnamese but his GOP opponent, Barry Goldwater, who had accused the president of being soft on communism. In response, LBJ and McNamara misrepresented the facts and the pretext for sending US ground forces to Vietnam, and deliberately concealed the costs of war. McNamara’s thinking was shaped by his “whiz kids,” DOD civilian nerds, who lacked combat experience and arrogantly believed quantitative statistical analysis could compensate for their deficits in geopolitics, history, and military strategy.

Boasting that he had won his election “bigger than anybody had won ever,” LBJ endorsed McNamara’s strategy of gradual pressure on Hanoi, seeking to wear it down by “attrition.” To McMaster, this was “not a strategy but a lack of it … reinforcing arrogance, weakness, lying in the pursuit of self-interest and above all dereliction of duty to the American people.”

2001 War of Necessity in Afghanistan

In this century, the one war the US won – at least in its initial stage – was Afghanistan. There, following the 9/11 attack on the US homeland, President George Bush defended America’s vital national interests. Nor was this a regular DoD operation by the US army. US forces consisted of CIA operators, Special Forces, and an anti-Taliban Afghan resistance, the Northern Alliance. The 1st Marine Expeditionary Brigade was also involved, commanded by the current Defense Secretary, then Major General James Mattis, USMC. In addition, the US was given logistical help by Russian President Vladimir Putin, then Bush’s strategic partner. Within three months, the US had defeated its foe, liberated Kabul, and changed the regime.

2003 War of Choice in Iraq  

But afterwards, as Paula Broadwell observed, the initial brilliant success in Afghanistan “was squandered when the US marched headlong into Iraq in early 2003.” Instead of finishing the war of necessity in Afghanistan, Washington entered into a war of choice with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein – who had had nothing to do with 9/11.

Why? In the words of historian Jean Edward Smith, the president tried to sell the war on the basis of “the flimsy notion that he was removing a potential threat to the United States” because Saddam might have WMD. That threat proved to be nonexistent. In addition, as a born-again Christian, Bush believed he was divinely guided to bring democracy to the Iraqi people.

On August 4, 2002, the 38th anniversary of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, Senator Chuck Hagel, a distinguished Vietnam veteran, told Congress, “We didn’t ask any questions before we got into Vietnam … this is why it’s important to do so now.” Two senior members of Bush’s team did so: Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill, who questioned the costs of war in Iraq; and Secretary of State General (ret.) Colin Powell, who prophesied ethnic divisions and insurgency. Both were subsequently marginalized by the Bush administration.

Like McNamara, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his two principal assistants, Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, lacked the combat experience necessary to make sound military decisions. In the end, the one who did have it – Powell – was proven right. He and Bob Richer, then head of the CIA’s Middle East Division, also blamed Bush’s NSA, Condoleezza Rice, for the subsequent attempt at instant democratic nation-building. As Richer explained, “Rice’s vision that Iraq had to look like us overnight was catastrophic.” The president, he observed, “was a realist, but he listened to her and was swayed.”

US forces were sufficient to topple Saddam following a major invasion. But instead of liberating the Iraqis, the Americans became hated occupiers. This gave rise to a Sunni insurgency, during which the US fired the Iraqi military without setting up a stipend program for the soldiers and their families (thus compelling them to subsist on nothing for five long weeks). The US then fired all Baath Party members down to Level 4 without any agreed reconciliation process. This gave tens of thousands of influential Iraqis – often Western-educated – an incentive to oppose the new Iraq rather than support it.

In the ensuing struggle over leadership, a virtual civil war erupted between Sunnis and Shiites, with Kurds in the mix as well – not to mention al-Qaeda, which was rising in the Sunni community in Iraq. The unfinished war in Afghanistan and the unending, Vietnam-like quagmire in Iraq produced two growing insurgencies.

The Surge of Petraeus and his “Shipmate” Mattis

Before he became, in early February 2007, Commander of Multi-National Forces in Iraq, General David Petraeus worked with Mattis to lead a prominent team of US Army and Marine experts on an Army/Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Referred to as “King David’s Bible,” this manual became an outstanding social science study of insurgencies and counter-insurgencies, as well as a guide to how to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis (and Afghans).

Those principles and techniques were applied by the forces under Petraeus in Iraq for over 19 months in 2007-08. The Surge, as the effort was known (due to the deployment of well over 25,000 additional American forces), ushered in a new strategy that was a 180-degree shift from the previous one, which had been assessed as failing in December 2006 by then-commander and ambassador Ryan Crocker.

The result was an 85% reduction in the level of violence and significant progress in a host of areas. President Bush deserves enormous credit for supporting the deployment of additional forces and for backing Petraeus and Crocker.

In late 2011, after some three years of further progress and additional reductions in violence, President Barack Obama decided to withdraw the remaining US combat forces and the last four-star US commander, leaving only a modest training mission.  He reportedly was concerned that there would not be an Iraqi parliament-approved Status of Forces Agreement. Iraqi PM Maliki subsequently pursued ruinous sectarian measures – orchestrating legal charges against the Sunni Arab Vice President and his security detail, and later targeting the Sunni Arab Finance Minister and a prominent Sunni Arab parliamentarian. He returned to Iraqi military and police units abusive Iraqi leaders whom General Petraeus had insisted be removed before US support would be provided, then had those forces put down peaceful Sunni demonstrations very violently. He stopped honoring agreements to provide various forms of assistance to tens of thousands of former Sunni insurgents who had reconciled with the government during the Surge.

Tragically, these actions undid much of what coalition and Iraqi forces had sacrificed to achieve, and the Sunni insurgency in Iraq began to rise again. Islamic State arose out of the ashes of the defeated al-Qaeda in Iraq.

2011: Obama‘s Leading from Behind in Libya

In 2011, to make matters even worse, Obama and his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, began to militate for yet another war, this time in Libya at the height of the “Arab Spring.” They did not heed Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s strenuous objections that it did not encompass “our vital national interests,” especially amidst two ongoing wars in the Middle East. Nor did Obama consider the war’s costs. Once again, the naysayer was ignored. Nine days later, Gates resigned.

Like LBJ and McNamara in Vietnam and Bush and Rice in Iraq, Obama and Clinton engaged in deceit about the real purpose of the war. Clinton argued that a NATO intervention was urgently needed to avert a massacre of Libyan civilians by Muammar Qaddafi’s troops. But her subsequently hacked e-mails substantiated that the real objective was regime change in the service of democratic nation-building.

After the rebels murdered Qaddafi, Libya, like Iraq earlier, became a paradise for tribal fighters and jihadists, and there ensued a significant flow of migrants to Europe. None of this chastened Clinton. She began to support secretly arming the Syrian rebels in a proxy war with both its dictator Assad and his patron, Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

Obama’s Strategic Patience  

On June 11, 2011, Obama announced that he would withdraw 10,000 troops from Afghanistan by the end of December 2011 and the rest of the 30,000-member surge force by July 2012 (i.e., before the Democratic Party convention). Once again there arose a troublesome naysayer.

General David Petraeus objected to the premature withdrawal. Aware as he was of the actual situation on the ground, he was adamant that the projected timing of the draw-down would jeopardize the progress made in the previous year of the surge in Afghanistan. Obama was forced to compromise, but did not forget Petraeus.

Rahm Emmanuel, Obama’s chief of staff and one of the president’s loyalists, suspected that Petraeus was contemplating his own presidential run in 2016. It did not help that Petraeus emphatically told Emmanuel he wasn’t. Two days after the 2012 presidential election, Petraeus resigned his post as CIA director because of an affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell. (The mishandling of classified information did not surface until months later.) When historian Smith queried “whether the Obama administration had taken advantage of his affair to cut his head off,” Petraeus smiled, but did not reply.

Towards Strategic Savvy

If there is any solace for Washington’s numerous follies in the Middle East, it is Donald Trump’s selection of an outstanding national security team: Mattis, McMaster, and General John Kelly (Homeland Security). With Trump’s election, America saw the dawn of a new doctrine to replace “strategic patience,” leading from behind, and the absence of strategy. We call the new approach “strategic savvy,” meaning the judicious use of military force, diplomacy, and economic instruments. Petraeus describes it as a “comprehensive and sustainable commitment” in defense of American vital national interests. The president and his security team seek to overturn policies that have produced only failed states, Islamist-fed chaos, growing terrorist attacks in Europe, and catastrophic debt.

We have witnessed the first actions defining this emerging doctrine. On April 7, 2017, US navy destroyers carried out a missile strike on a Syrian airfield in retribution for Assad’s use of chemical weapons against his subjects. A tactical move, it bore profound strategic significance, since it used judicious force to accomplish what Obama had failed to do in 2013 despite his own declared red line. So did the dropping of the “Mother of All Bombs” (MOAB, or Massive Ordnance Air Blast), the largest conventional bomb in the US arsenal, on ISIS fighters in Afghanistan on April 14.

Facing what Mattis has called a “clear and present danger” from North Korea, Trump’s team did not put the problem off in the manner of the past three US administrations. He is meeting it head on with an unprecedented deployment of three carrier groups with massive naval and air power. This is intended to send a clear message on the need to stop a maniacal leader from accomplishing a nuclear weaponization and delivery system that could eventually reach American shores. President Trump has communicated this need to Chinese President Xi very clearly as well. The era of Obama’s “strategic patience” is finally over.

Future presidents should consider replicating Trump’s placement of national security responsibilities in the hands of individuals with combat experience. America’s future leaders should be men and women with such experience combined with intellectual prowess.

In the meantime, the saga continues. Americans are transfixed by Russo-gate, much as they were by Watergate. President Trump’s political opponents seek to undo the results of the 2016 election by painting him as Putin’s Manchurian candidate.

Trump should now do what Obama did not: pardon Petraeus, whom Gates called “one of the nation’s great battle captains.” As Senator Rand Paul observed, Petraeus showed his personal journals, which did contain classified material, to only one person, an Army reserve intelligence officer with a top secret clearance. Her book was thoroughly checked for classified information and any sensitive political items by the then head of West Point’s Social Sciences Department, Colonel Mike Meese. The negligent Hillary Clinton, still unpunished, revealed classified material to the multitudes through her unsecured server.

Petraeus sympathizes with the beleaguered Trump’s predicament, but only to a certain extent. Like the authors, he realizes that Trump, a novice at presidential politics, has made big mistakes and then repeated them, making things worse.

In his final address as a general, Petraeus quoted Teddy Roosevelt’s 1910 Men in the Arena speech. The words are now surely applicable to both of them:

It is not the critic who counts … the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood … who errs and comes up short again and again … but who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotions, who spends himself for a triumph of high achievement and … if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.

The authors are indebted to General David Petraeus for his comments and suggestions.

VIEW PDF

Dr. Jiri Valenta and his wife, Leni, are the principals of The Institute of Post Communist Studies and Terrorism (jvlv.net). They are authors of a forthcoming book on Russia and US interventions in the 21st century. A prominent author and speaker, Jiri served for decade as a professor and coordinator of Soviet and East European Studies at the US Naval Post-Graduate School and former consultant to senior members of Reagan administration.

BESA Center Perspectives Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family

JVLV: DAVID PETRAEUS IS BEST CANDIDATE FOR NSA!

Dr. Jiri Valenta

Published Author, U.S. Nat'l Sec., Russia,Terrorism. CFR member. Consult. U.S. gvt., Contrib. FP TNI, NYT, Wash.Times

They’re talking about income equality, poverty, unemployment extensions, the sun, the moon, global warming and all in between hoping that once again they can distract Americans from the real problems.

Problems like murder in Benghazi, the Fast and Furious Gunrunner scam, spying on Americans, stealing taxpayer’s money, forcing a healthcare system on us that will cause and is causing financial and physical stress on millions of Americans are issues they slide under the rug. . 

 But, let’s put everything into perspective the real issues of the day are the Fast and Furious scandal that resulted in the murder of two brave American men, Brian Terry and Jaime Zapata.   Obama and Eric Holder own this but even though Holder lied under oath the scandal was never solved.

Then there’s the Benghazi scandal - family members are waiting, waiting for someone to give them honest answers and put those responsible behind bars.  They have a right to know why their dear ones were murdered, who was responsible for the deaths of their brave family members, Christopher Stevens, Tyrone Woods, Glen Doherty and Sean Smith

The families of our four American men murdered in Benghazi are left to fend for themselves, because so far the hearings, investigations and political posturing has merely been the White House’s usual “dog and pony” show by Obama, Democrats and Republicans. Nothing done the scandal never resolved!

Next is Obamacare - Obama, Democrats and the Liberal News Media have collaborated to defend this unconstitutional and poorly choreographed healthcare law come hell or high water.  They are trying to convince us the ACA website is purring along without any major glitches – that’s all garbage.  While the front end of the website may be functioning to some degree the back end is doomed to crash at any minute.

Insurance companies are facing unbelievable problems daily because Obama dumped everything in their lap  – there are 13,000 Americans as of January 8^th 2014 who have been totally lost in the system .– this doesn’t include the millions who lost their insurers. The broken down website has assigned the same case numbers to more than one individual or individuals along with ghost files where the insured has an enrollment record, but the Government doesn’t.  Either way these Americans don’t have health insurance

On top of all that the Insurers don’t have an automated system to identify the insured – the ACA website sort of forgot that important piece, just like they forgot to install software that would protect American’s vital information.  Many with life threatening illnesses who originally had good insurance and signed up for Obamacare have been lost or eaten up by the Government healthcare website. 

These are the real issues of the day – it’s time to get real and solve these scandals and put those behind bars who are responsible. 

Obama & John Boehner are way too busy playing politics and both obviously have forgotten the oaths they took when entering office.  Obama’s desperate because very few Americans admire, trust or believe anything he says – his polls show this statement to be very true.

Boehner keeps straddling the fence and doesn’t want to offend the Democrats or the Old Republican establishment, so he opts for doing absolutely nothing versus doing his duty as Speaker of the House. 

Obama, the Democrats and Liberal news media are the first inline to attack, demonize and destroy anyone that might interferes with their political agenda.  Observe how they’ve pounced on Chris Christie over the bridge scandal or Ted Cruz over repealing Obamacare.  Notice that they’re always MIA when it comes to the critical issues facing our Nation.

Bill Gates nailed the Obama Administration when he said, “I felt that agreements with the Obama White House were good only as long as they were politically convenient.” The past five years under Obama backs up what Bill Gates said – that is why Benghazi, Fast and Furious, NSA, IRS and Obamacare have been relegated to the ancient history shelves. 

Obama is responsible for these scandals – all occurred on his watch and before 2014 there’s a strong possibility there will be more Americans dying on his watch due to Obamacare. Those with terminal illnesses or life threatening illnesses have had their insurers, their medical teams and their hospitals taken from them – many may succumb to their illnesses due to this selfish, dangerous dictator.

Until Americans wake up and realize the war is on our turf and Obama must be removed from office before 2016 - we will remain the victims of a Socialistic Government.

Republicans and Democrats are playing Russian Roulette in the White House - they’re responsible for a weakened Nation, an entitlement society, Big Government, unsecured borders, weakened Military  and excessive violations against our Constitution. 

As Always,

Little Tboca

Well, Christmas Day is a day of celebration for some – welcoming the Christ Child into our humble abodes.  Others deny the birth of Jesus denying  themselves of the greatest gift ever given to mankind (eternal life.)  Still there are millions who celebrates Christmas around the “Jolly Plump” man never once giving a thought to how they will pay off all the charge cards they’ve maxed out.  Regardless of how Americans opt to celebrate December 25^th, there is one constant (ACA) that remains one of our worst fears as we close 2013 and prepare for a New Year.

Forbes is usually pretty dependable on their news reporting, but today I read a brief on Forbes about Obama care that pretty much resembles scrambled “mush.”  Bruce Japsen, contributor for Forbes wrote in his article the healthcare.gov had received 2 million site visits and 250,000 of those visitors were rushing to complete their applications whatever that might mean

At first glance, one would believe that Obamacare was running full steam ahead without any glitches.  But, there’s more to this story and Obama’s gophers keep burying the truth in hopes that success will be just around the corner.  The only real question should be this – how many of our young generation have signed up for Obamacare?  My guess is very, very few!

According to Bruce, the Obama Administration is determined to meet the 7 million by March 1, 2014 and there is where the “Sh—t” will hit the fan.  It wouldn’t matter if they exceeded the 7 million mark if the youth don’t sign up for Obama’s plan.  Just because 1.9 (according to Sebelius) have completed the eligibility process doesn’t mean tiddly poop. So far those 1.9 haven’t chosen any plan so they could pretty much be put into a drive by status meaning they split without choosing or paying for any plan.

803,000 were eligible for some type Medicaid plan – so we’re basically right back to October 1, 2013 with only a handful of takers.  Obama is trying to sell a “pig in a poke” and keeps extending the deadline and payment date for those consumers who are desperate.

2014 will darn sure start out with a bang for Americans – there will be those who lie about needing a subsidy, those who can’t afford the co pay or deductibles and millions more who will find themselves totally uninsured.  Most of those who are insured have lost their primary care physician, hospital and insurer.

We’re heading for a one payer system that will pretty much be in the bag if Obama isn’t stopped prior to December 2014.  In addition to the millions who lost their insurers in 2013, millions more will lose their employer insurance because businesses won’t be able to afford ACA meaning employees hours will be cut back to reduce the cost of employer insurance.

Millions more will drop ACA due to the high co pays and deductibles in 2014.   Obama knew all of this in 2010 and has strategically placed us at the mercy of a Government controlled healthcare plan knowing from the gecko that probably 70 to 80 million or more will be subsidized by the Government.

We’ve just been duped by the Obama Administration one more time for billions already spent on ACA – taxpayer’s money gone forever just like our stimulus package.  Will Obama spend trillions more the next three years to continue his “redistribution” scheme?  Will ACA be repealed and if so what will the the costs and repercussions be to initiate some semblance of normality to our healthcare system? 

Will Obama, Democrats and Republicans be held responsible for NSA, IRS, Benghazi, Fast and Furious, financing the Muslim Brotherhood or will Americans remain at the mercy of big Government for the next three years?

As Always,

Little Tboca

Edward_Snowden- Pryed open the door on massive NSA collection of Millions of American

Phone Records – photo credit – Wikipedia

Are your private conversations safe from Obama administration NSA snooping? According to a U.S. federal judge, your “U.S. Constitutional rights are being violated daily by the collecting of dialing records of all U.S. calls in America,” according to the LA Times. It appears that the Fourth Amendment’s strict ban on unreasonable searches by government was abolished by the NSA massive data collection efforts, suggests the court.

This marks the first time in the history of the nation that a federal judge has ruled that the collection of these records were not within the scope of the government legitimate right to collect possibly invasive private phone data. The court stated that the rights of innocent Americans not under suspicion of terrorist activities should be protected. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon was clear about the possible violation of the Constitutional rights of Americans by NSA surveillance activities.

The top secret data mining activities came to light earlier in the year due to the public revelations of former NSA analyst Edward Snowden. Judge Leon stressed, “Today’s computerized gathering of all dialing records represents a new threat to privacy that was not fully recognized in the past,” according to the LA Times.

( Click to Read More )

Impeach and Convict Obama

Prelude

• This is directed to Megyn Kelly, Jay Sekulow, Judge Andrew Napolitano, Mark Levin, Bill O’Reilly, the entire 113^th Congress, and ALL other public figures who present themselves as Protectors and Champions of TRUTH.    

America NEEDS you NOW.

• He has committed numerous offenses against our Constitution and our Citizens; all requiring Impeachment and Conviction
• It is the Duty and Responsibility of the 113^th Congress to Impeach and Convict
• As Officers of our Courts, ALL Lawyers are “Oathed” to    “….support the Constitution of  the United States….”               Admission to the Bar              Michigan Oath
• IF you , each or collectively, fail in your duty to Impeach and Convict or to support Impeachment and Conviction the only remaining remedy will be the Citizens.

Outline

Below are sections that deal with

• His Impeachable Offenses… the Charges….
  • They are not detailed but they are documented.
  • His Motives and Means.
  • His Duties and Responsibilities
  • What YOU must DO

The Charges

By virtue of his Oath Barack Hussein Obama (BHO) is guilty of High Crimes and Misdemeanors, Impeachable under our Constitution. Some of his offenses may also qualify as Criminal. I am not a Lawyer so cannot make those judgments.

Here is a partial list of events that surround the charges

• Failure to prosecute Black Panthers for Voter Intimidation
• Fast and Furious and the death of Brian Terry
• Politically arranged firing of Government Whistleblowers  - Gerald Walpin
• The Benghazi Tragedy
• IRS abuse of our constitution… and hiding behind the 5^th to avoid revealing criminal activity
• NSA spying
• Illegal tapping of Reporters telephones
• BRIBERY (political pork BRIBERY) to buy Congressional votes to pass obamacare.
• LYING to America….”If you like……………..you can keep…………. PERIOD. Reference
• Covering his lie with an illegal, unconstitutional swindle that directs Insurance Cos to break the law.

I have not detailed the charges. Congressional staffers can do their part by developing the details. In case they can’t find a way to get started, here are some “Starter Links”.

• The obamacare LIE
• Calls for Impeachment
• The Stockman Move   every Congressman got a copy of Impeachable Offenses
• The Book on Obama

The bottom line is that there are more than plenty of documentable, Unconstitutional , Illegal, actions by BHO that demand Impeachment.

I call on the 113^th Congress to do their duty or become accessories, accomplices, aiders, and abettors of these many illegal, Impeachable offenses.

Motives and Means

The MEANS are easiest to describe;

• He has illegally managed to gain control of our Presidency. From that vantage point his
  • Illegal Executive Orders
  • Illegal proclamations that overrun Congress ( with little or no pushback)
  • His bully blamecalling
  • Installation of communist partners into high level government positions

provide THE MEANS.

His motives are deep and complex. All of these have established BHO as one who believes America is unfair and needs to be Socialized then taken to full Communism.

• His entire youth was spent being indoctrinated, brainwashed, into Communist ideology.
• His reported education was at America’s dens of Socialism.. Columbia;  Cloward-Piven
• His 20 years as a congregant of J Wright’s Black Theology Church. He lied when he said nothing rubbed off, or.... he is too intellectually challenged to be President.
• His Chicago affiliation with terrorists(Ayres) and political thugs(Alinsky) have “refined” his hatred of America

Duties and Responsibilities

Detailed arguments about his duties and responsibilities are in Appendix A.

In summary, the BUCK stops at BHO. He IS responsible for his own lies and illegal actions. But he is also responsible and accountable for all his subordinates and their illegal acts.

(Holder, Sebellius, Reid, Pelosi, etc)

Beyond the illegal acts are his FAILURES TO ACT.

Can anyone provide a reference to BHO publicly or privately DEMANDING that those responsible for Fast & Furious or Benghazi-gate or the IRS scandal etc.,  be identified, prosecuted, fired and jailed?

YOUR Responsibilities

This section is simple.  To the 113^th congress, your Oath to Support our Constitution demands that you support and move on Impeachment and Conviction of BHO.

To Megyn and all other officers of our Courts, we need you to help America NOW. My prior pleas to GOP leaders in the House and Senate have fallen on deaf ears. I did not even get a courtesy reply to my Faxes.

If you fail, as is true so far, then YOU TOO ARE GUILTY and need to be removed from Office.

Appendix A – The BUCK STOPS at BHO

This is long but instructive…………from succinct language in our Constitution to exploring the meaning and bounds of High Crimes and Misdeanors.

Impeachment

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/11/the-grounds-for-impeachment.html

Grounds

The legal term "high crimes and misdemeanors" is found in Article II § 4 of the U. S. Constitution; quoting the section in its entirety:

"The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High crimes and Misdemeanors."

This section constitutionally secures a provision for the involuntary removal from office of the President, Vice-President, Cabinet Secretaries, other executive officers, as well as federal judges.  The reason for this provision is the observation at the Constitutional Convention by Benjamin Franklin that the removal of "obnoxious" chief executives had, historically, been accomplished by assassination, and his recommendation that a proceduralized mechanism for removal would be preferable.

Treason and bribery are well understood crimes, and don't need much explanation here.  (Treason is even specifically defined in Article III § 3.)  But high crimes and misdemeanors . . . hmm, what's that?  Jerry Ford once famously asserted, "An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history."  To the extent that the U. S. House of Representatives is the sole and final arbiter of what constitutes grounds for impeachment of a federal official, he's right; but to the extent that this is even a remotely accurate description of the scope of high crimes and misdemeanors, it's not even close.

At the Constitutional Convention, treason and bribery were readily adopted as grounds for impeachment, but two other proposals, corruption and maladministration, were rejected as being overbroad and too vague.  Instead, George Mason proposed the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors against the state," which was shortened to "high crimes and misdemeanors" and then adopted with little discussion.  The reason for the ready adoption is that the Founding Fathers were well acquainted with the concept, because it had about four centuries of precedent (since 1386) in English parliamentary use.  Explaining the grounds for impeachment in Federalist Paper # 65, Alexander Hamilton wrote (emphasis in source):

"The subjects of its jurisdiction are those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust.  They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."

This concept survives today in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which  recognizes as punishable offenses such things as refusal to obey orders, abuse of authority, dereliction of duty, moral turpitude, and conduct unbecoming.  These would not be prosecutable offenses if committed by a civilian with no official position, but in the military they are offenses which bear on the accused's fitness for the duties he holds, which he is bound by oath or affirmation to perform.  Thus, the emphasis in the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" is the word high, because we're referring to offenses that an ordinary person, who is not serving as an elected or appointed-and-confirmed federal executive (or as a duly seated federal judge) is incapable of committing.  As an example, an ordinary person isn't going to have any official powers to misuse or abuse, but an elected executive (or one who has been appointed and duly confirmed) could face impeachment for precisely that reason.

The Founding Fathers were well aware of the concept of "executive accountability" (a concept also well understood by anyone who's served in the military), which means that an executive is legally responsible, and accountable, for all of his subordinates, as well as their agents and contractors (most certainly not limited to only those over whom he has direct supervision).  The legal concept is a form of vicarious liability, and the standard of proof is "preponderance of evidence."

Keep in mind that that which can be "lain at the feet" of the official in question and "proven beyond a reasonable doubt" is way too narrow an interpretation of the accountability threshold.  The executive in question is expected to be aware, at all times, of what every single one of his subordinates (and their agents and contractors) is doing - or is supposed to be doing - and must thoroughly remedy any misconduct committed by any of them as soon as he becomes aware of it.  Nor is it necessary to show that such violations occurred at the executive's instigation or with his foreknowledge, but only that, based upon the preponderance of the evidence, the executive was, or reasonably should have been, aware of misconduct on the part of his subordinates.  "Plausible deniability" is void ab initio as a defense, because the executive doesn't have the luxury of ignorance.

That executive accountability would be grounds for impeachment recognizes that holding an executive or judicial office of public trust is not a right, but a privilege, and that violating the trust invested in the office forfeits the privilege of holding it.  Nor is it just presidents and federal judges who are liable under Article II § 4; there is precedent for impeaching a cabinet secretary (see: Secretary of War, William W. Belknap, impeached on March 2, 1876, and Treasury Secretary, Andrew W. Mellon, who resigned on February 12, 1932, with impeachment proceedings in progress).  And it stands to reason that executive agency/bureau directors, especially those who hold a de facto cabinet rank (such as the Director of the EPA), should count as "civil officers" for impeachment purposes.

http://www.rightmichigan.com/story/2013/5/22/182420/185

 = = = = = = =

More from above…………..

After test-marketing the excuse that the IRS selectively slow-walking non-profit applications was due to the Citizens United v. FEC decision, the Obama Administration has started floating the umbrella defense that systemic incompetence isn't the same thing as corruption, and now that they're aware of the problems, we can trust that they will exercise all due competence at getting to the bottom of this.  Someone needs to get the memo to Jay Carney that even the typically disinterested voters aren't buying the cockalayne that BHO learned about these things in the same place we did, the newspapers, and that outraged cluelessness isn't inspiring a whole lot of confidence in America's chief executive.

That a cabinet secretary (let alone the president) would have left key policy decisions to management-level subordinates, without so much as reviewing them, is a critical point of their culpability.  Quite frankly, it boggles my mind that blatant acts of malfeasance would have heretofore escaped executive scrutiny.  Specifically:

• Who ordered the political witch hunt by the IRS against Tea Party, Pro-Israel, Pro-Life, Conservative, and Christian organizations?
• Who ordered a stand down to the military response in Benghazi?  (General Carter Ham and Rear Admiral Charles Gaouette should know the answer to this one.)
• Further, who ordered the coverup of what really happened in Benghazi?  (12 major revisions to the "talking points" . . . seriously.)
• Who ordered that at least 20 phone lines used by Associated Press reporters be tapped?
• Who ordered the EPA to provide fee waivers to green-leaning groups but deny them to conservative groups?

We already know that these weren't the actions of rouge operatives who'd decided to frolic outside the scope of their duties as employees of the federal government.  More than one person is already on record that the orders came from much further up the management food chain than some random field office.  The record is already beginning to show that executive-level officers had been briefed on some of these matters as far back as two years ago.  At some point, the question must be officially asked, "What did the President know and when did he know it?"  Throwing an "acting director" - who's gone in a month anyway - under the bus isn't going to cut it.

The connect-the-dots on Benghazi is enough alone to warrant the establishment of a select committee (or perhaps the appointment of a special prosecutor) to investigate what Rand Paul has labeled "staggering abuses of power" . . . maybe another marathon filibuster is in order.

I suspect that the reason that there isn't more public outcry is, in my opinion, twofold: (1) the co-opted media is having a helluva time getting past their pro-commie bias; and (2) the "bread and circuses" American culture is more interested in what's going on with the Kardashians (or the latest "teen mom" story) than what's going on in Washington.  It's uncertain at this point whether the wiretapping scandal is going to arouse the media from their kool-aid-induced stupor, but Mr. Carney's job doesn't seem to be getting any easier.  As for the hoi polloi . . . well, judging by the "magazine" covers that I see in the grocery store checkout aisle, until either the people's house or the fourth estate start doing their jobs, don't expect the typical disinterested voter (~68.26% of the electorate) to give a damn, and more's the pity because of it.

Because, quite frankly, and for whatever my opinion is worth, not only should Barack Obama and Eric Holder be staring down the business end of impeachment charges, but so also should Hillary Clinton, Tim Geithner, Leon Panetta, and Lisa Jackson.  The abuse of power is just that egregious, and the example that needs to be set is just that severe.  I have no idea what the precedent is for impeaching a federal executive who's no longer in office, but a hypothetical conviction could, theoretically, bring about the punishment specified in U. S. Constitution Article I § 3, Clause 7 (specifically, permanent disqualification from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit in the federal government going forward).  That'll throw a wrench into Hillary 2016.

(And if there's any truth to the scuttlebutt that Kathleen Sebelius is using the authority of her office to conduct a shakedown of the healthcare industry in order to raise funds for the federal exchanges, then throw her in with the rest of the lot.)

= = = = = =

From Washington post

Contemporaneous comments on the scope of impeachment are persuasive as to the intention of the framers. In Federalist No. 65, Alexander Hamilton described the subject of impeachment as

those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself.⁵⁹

Comments in the state ratifying conventions also suggest that those who adopted the Constitution viewed impeachment as a remedy for usurpation or abuse of power or serious breach of trust. Thus, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina stated that the impeachment power of the House reaches "those who behave amiss, or betray their public trust."⁶⁰ Edmund Randolph said in the Virgina convention that the President may be impeached if he "misbehaves."⁶¹ He later cited the example of the President's receipt of presents or emoluments from a foreign power in violation of the constitutional prohibition of Article I, section 9. ⁶² In the same convention George Mason argued that the President might use his pardoning power to "pardon crimes which were advised by himself" or, before indictment or conviction, "to stop inquiry and prevent detection." James Madison responded:

[I]f the President be connected, in any suspicious manner, with any person, and there be grounds tp believe he will shelter him, the House of Representatives can impeach him; they can remove him if found guilty...⁶³

Washington Post

Obama and supporters are melting down ,as their lies may have finally caught up with them. There have been many and people forget, but with millions of insurance policies canceled and millions more to come the big lie about , " If you like your insurance you can keep it, period" , may have finally caught up with the Liar in Chief. Now, maybe Congress will impeach Holder and some others. Fast N Furious, in which Obama signed an Executive order stating Holder did not have to turn over information about that operation, IRS scandal, NSA Scandal, Benghazi murders, Military Chaplain harassment and persecution( Christian Only), EPA abuse of power, EO presidential abuse of power, Going around Congress, War on coal, (Which will start hitting everyone in the pocket book), gutting the military, Attacks on the morale of the military, e.g., unisex hat for Marines, Insurance lies and Obama care, which is not affordable, etc.  

Obama didn’t know…WHY?

There is a long list of things Obama didn’t know about

What in hell is he getting paid for?

He didn't know....Why not?

•  Fast & furious.... He didn't know
• IRS......He didn't know
• Assoc Press.... He didn't know
• Obamacare...... He didn't know
• NSA………. He didn't know
• Benghazi….. He didn't know
• Spying on Mexico….. He didn't know
• Spying on Brazil…… He didn't know
• Spying on  France…… He didn't know
• Spying on  Germany….. He didn't know
• On and on and on………….. He didn't know

 What has he been doing?

Can anybody bring him any tough news?

...or does he demand only good news?

Does he have ANY interest?

Not to worry……………..

I have his personal promise

I can keep my health plan. Period

I can keep my doctor. Period

Thank God for Rep Brooks protecting our technology.

First Obama agrees to reduce our ICBM force down to 1550 missiles and then the Russian were allowed to see defense missile in old silos that have been converted to defense missiles. While Rep Brooks seeks to block Obama from giving the Russians our technology Obama is still seeking to declassify information about our missiles so they can share it. Wow, Obama is doing the enemies work for them!

I guess this is one of the things Obama meant when he told the Russians he would have more flexibility after the re-election. We know Obama is letting the Chinese attend our Naval exercises and I am sure when they went to meet the Russians afterwards they did not share everything. Obama wants to cut 12 brigades and two of our active carriers, which have a sub and many other ships with them. Seems like a wish list from the Russians and Chinese are Obama's to do list. 

Can not think of why anyone would want to impeach Obama and not just let him do what he does so well until his term expires.

The Washington Free Beacon  reported, "The visit by the Russians is likely to prompt concerns on Capitol Hill from Republicans opposed to the administration’s efforts to share missile defense technology with the Russians.

Rep. Mo Brooks (R., Ala.) revealed in May during congressional testimony from Vice Adm. James D. Syring, director of the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency, that the administration has sought to declassify sensitive missile defense technology that could be shared with Moscow.

As a result, Brooks drafted legislation that would prohibit the Pentagon from releasing classified missile defense know-how to the Russians, specifically advanced hit-to-kill missile defense interceptor technology."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-_EAPvzg2E

While I think we must be able to track terrorists the government must follow the law and not make the law, as they go especially when the AG is the only approval needed. Obama says no spying at the NSA on citizens, well that is not true, ( LIE). No real story out there, so Benghazi or as Hillary stated what difference does it make? A big lie. Mis-direction, unconstitutional actions, abusive executive orders, excessive regulations, murdered Ambassador and three other Americans, dozens of Embassies attacked and recently shut down. Defeated Islamic terrorist (LIE) which caused us to shut dozens of Embassies, Run a way agencies regulating the US to death and blatantly going around our weak kneed Congress, Emails and phone calls collected and read but denied until Snowden leaked, 

Now Hillary is going to be glamorized by the NBC, CNN and others. The President praised her a the best or one of the best Secretary of States we have ever had , ( Payback for Clinton's endorsement). REALLY? Remember Hillary hitting the reset button with the Russians,( Which was not translated correctly and they laughed at her about it) ,  gave in on EU defense missile shield, decimated the Space Program and paying the Russian's 60 million USD for a space ride in older crafts than our shuttle, openly pined about taking our nuclear weapons down to zero or as close as possible,  unilaterally. The Russians have zero respect and fear of the US and demonstrated that with Snowden's Asylum. Dozens of Embassies attacked, Ambassador and 3 other Americans murdered , recently shut down embassies due to defeated terrorists (NOT), Benghazi cover up for illegal weapons and ambush, jailed video maker for offensive film, ( Still in jail for violation of something), What difference does it make comment, Sounds like her comment on Bill, " If I do not care why do you", Throw in Whitewater, while she was a crazy kid, ( Her and Bill both had their law license at the time), Commodity trade which was not legal and where a big Clinton support LOST $100,000, her youthful legal defense team work for the black panthers and then work on the Nixon impeachment investigation. Her progression at Rose Hill Law Firm progressed when Bill's career, etc.

We know when Diane Lane portrays Hillary it will be a rosy uplifting story of struggle and wonderful dedicated public servant who has sacrificed much for her country. Can you say exaggeration? Fluff? A drooling bias pseudo docudrama?   

Liberals like to belittle, attack and/or demean any one or group that doesn't believe like them. While Conservatives believe in live and let live and do not insist you agree with them. Conservatives  may try to persuade you to understand their side, but respect your right to be different.  I was listening to Rush and he summed it up like that and I think that is right on.

Case in point, Charlie Rangel and others on MSNBC said the Tea Party members were like terrorists , racists of crackers. We know that cracker is not a racist term per the testimony from a recent comment made during the Zimmerman procedure. It is shameful and one reason why so few people watch MSNBC and listen to Charlie.  Again, if you do not agree with these liberals you are belittled and attacked,  as the enemy. So much for the First Amendment in America under the liberal leadership. I.e., IRS and NSA targeting, complete disregard and no respect for Congress by Obama and his minions, czars and appointees. Then you have the silencing of Benghazi and Fast n Furious whistle blowers.

Now, Obama openly is hiring propaganda specialists to NUDGE Americans to his position. Congress or most of them do nothing while this frontal assault is set up to compliment the cover ups, lies and out right disrespect shown for Congress, Constitution, Bill of Rights and every American who dares to disagree with Obama.

Anyone following the list of Obama scandals and the accompanying media spin assuring us that every thing is fine, just turn the channel to a reality show; are surely on sensory overload.


 Let's just stop this torture by a thousand cuts and get down to what is happening before our 'lying' eyes. The Bill of Rights, our founding principles of guaranteed freedom for the individual from an encroaching government is being whittled down to nothing. 

 The proof is before you. There is a palpable chill on anything resembling dissent against this regime. If you oppose Obama, it is because you are a racist. 


 If you are in support of the notion of the "Tea Party", as a spiritual revival of assertive, American individuality in defying a powerful king, by tossing his "tea" into the Boston Harbor of our discontent, you are a bigot.


 First Amendment: The Right of the people to freedom of religion, press, speech shall not... well, seems the IRS under the spell of the Obama regime abolished that Amendment based on applicants with opposing perspectives, and members of the Press Corps. were targeted for no better reason. 


 The mantra that seems to lull the public into an hypnotic trance is "terrorism", "safety", "public good". Everyone just walks away as if drugged, sedated, and mindlessly aloof. 


 Second Amendment: The Right of the People..to keep and bear arms.. shall not be infringed. Well, that one is all but eradicated from the New York State Constitution. The very notion of owning a firearm is being purged from the American mind. Toy guns, cops and robbers, good guys vs. bad guys, are being scrubbed from the brain with a metal Brillo pad. 


 If a child so much as bites a pop tart into the shape of a gun, he is punished, lambasted, and treated as if he has a mental disease. Any protest to oppose it is met with again, the hypnotic mantra of; "terrorism", child safety", "security". Then the public wanders off to look at the  and animal shapes floating in the clouds. 


 Which brings us to the discussion for those of you who dare to cling to the Bill of Rights. Who dare to think for yourselves. Who dare to question. Who, if you are like me, cannot be so easily entranced into inaction. 


 First, Mr. Snowden, who is the whistle-blower that exposed the insidious conduct of the U.S. Government secretly, and without your authorization, is invading your privacy, your right to be secure in your private papers, home, and inner thoughts, with a massive, leviathan serpent driven by an insatiable  for your private information, whose belly is being built in a massive construction project in Utah, that our U.S. Congress did not know about or authorize, yet got  approval for it, under the hypnotic mantra of "safety and security and terrorism."


 Well, Bull hockey and horse apples, if you believe we are supposed to be kept safe from totalitarian minded terrorist, by surrendering our Bill of Rights to a fascistic, totalitarian government. 


 I make the case for No, Thank you. I make the case for we will keep our Bill of Rights, forego surrendering any more freedoms to this government, and reclaim those already absconded. 

 The spin story is not Mr. Snowden's hero or traitor status for exposing what the government should not be doing to us.   His and their mission is not to protect government secrets from us.  His and their mission is to protect us from a secret government trying to take over by destroying our Constitution.


 The real story is the government is doing it right under our very nose, before our eyes, under the guise of State secrets, national security, and public safety. 

 Nothing is further from the truth. The IRS was used as a political weapon against free speech and political dissent by this Regime. That is an affront and assault on the Bill of Rights.

 Our military is being torn to pieces by incompetence and dereliction at the highest levels of our Executive Branch. That is an assault on our national security of greater impact that what Mr. Snowden pointed out.


 Our economy, our currency, our markets, are being ravaged by an ideology that is incompatible with capitalism. This is an assault on our economic prosperity and attack on the fabric of our national power. 

 Now, look into my eyes, when I snap my fingers, you will wake up, reject this destructive behavior by this regime, restore our Bill of Rights, assert your individual freedom, protect your home, your family and economic well being with every molecule of your existence. 

 If we abolish the Bill of Rights, and surrender our individualism, then collectivism and totalitarianism will be all that remains. 


 SNAP!! WAKE UP!! Now get to it.

Anthony Mele, MA, Diplomacy, International Conflict Management

www.amiglobalsecurity.com

http://newcity.patch.com/groups/anthony-meles-blog/p/abolish-the-bill-of-rights---what-is-left

These guys are masters of DECEPTION

NSA Slicksters

Those guys are Pros……………

In the NSA hearings yesterday, Mr Rogers ( Mike?) asked Gen Alexander if the Gov’t

Has the ABILITY to listen in on phone calls.

The slick old General replied…. We do not have that AUTHORITY

How’s that for “bending” an answer ?

Fortunately Mr Rogers was on to him and asked a follow up

Check it out at about 4 min 40 sec of this link

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/thomas-roberts/52241362

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/facebook-discloses-national-security-request-data-92842.html#ixzz2WHkIJNIX

The Honorable Congressman Smith                                                                              10 June 2013

The Honorable Senator Cornyn

The Honorable Senator Cruz

Good morning Gentlemen;

With the recent revelations the Executive Branch of our government is spying on Americans - instead of jihadists and terrorists - I would like to pose a few questions for your consideration.

1. Why has no one in Congress forced this administration to revoke Department of Homeland Security (DHS) document IA-0257-09 (2009)? This document gives them their extra-legislative "authority" (sic) to declare Americans are the terrorists - instead of the real terrorists. How do you think Veterans feel about being called "terrorists" when many of these Veterans gave up quite a bit (some of them body parts) to fight for this Nation? I appreciate the Letter Congressman Smith wrote Janet Napolitano back in 2009 - but Gentlemen, this is not enough. This administration clearly ignores your letters!

2. In light of the recent revelations and claims the National Security Agency (NSA) and DHS were monitoring U.S. citizens phones, Internet and financial transactions - and in light of the massive computing power available within only one of these "Data Centers".... how is it that Congress has apparently accepted the excuse that all they are doing is logging records to and from? It is patently obvious to anyone with any knowledge of computers, that only one of these "data centers" has the capability of doing that particular alleged "job" - for the entire world - yet we have multiple "data centers" scattered over the U.S. with these abilities - one of them right here in San Antonio!

Is it not a bit more likely that they are, indeed, unconstitutionally spying on Americans e-mails, Internet, texts, telephone conversations and bank transactions? With multiple "data centers" and this kind of computing horsepower, they certainly have the ability to do so. I found an article written back on 10 June 2010 in the Tea Party Economist that stated there were 854,000 paid individuals spying on Americans. How many are there today?

3. We are in "sequestration", it began this year. Congress determined the amount would be an $86 Billion dollar cut. A report this morning found within the news online "Financial Times" - that the U.S. is spending $80 Billion annually on this intelligence gathering... Granted, not all of that would be going to these "data centers", but my assumption is a majority of it indeed is... There are indeed many programs this administration is spending taxpayer money on that fly in the face of Congressional rulings and decisions - yet the House has not pulled his plug to stop his frivolous squandering of taxpayer monies  and subsequent deepening of our National Debt. This administration seems bent on depleting our resources to the point where our Nation WILL default on loans - and our economy will fall in the toilet - providing President Obama his opportunity to declare martial law in a time of peace.

Do you really want to go there?

4. We have the Veterans Administration (VA) declaring certain Veterans are incapable of handling their own finances - all without due process of law or a Court involvement - removing their 2nd Amendment rights under the Constitution of the United States and "appointing" someone other than themselves or a family member to handle all of their finances.... We have a Democratic Senator who openly stated on-camera that all Military Veterans have Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and should not be allowed to own a weapon. To date; approximately 160,000 Veterans Nation-wide have lost their 2nd Amendment rights by these VA actions and these Veterans are forced to fight this illegal and unconstitutional action in a Court of Law - because Congress has provided no assistance, has taken no action to put a stop to it. This should NOT be the way a Nation treats those who fought for it.

I cannot begin to express how disgraceful this is. Words evade me.

So, Gentlemen... we have Sequestration, we have the highest deficit in U.S. history, we have Executive Branch overreach that exceeds the limits of the Constitution of the United States, we have extra-legislative regulations that violate the Constitution (EPA, IRS, HHS), we have monstrous taxpayer expenditures not approved by Congress (State Department) and extra-legislative actions authored and executed on a daily basis by an administration gone wild with power (NSA, DOJ, CIA, DHS, VA).

I would like to know when you are going to convince your peers on the other side of the isle that they too - and their constituents, are at risk here.

And here is another thought for you to chew on and review; In all of these hearings and Investigations that continue in all of the existing known scandals, and the scandals that continue to be revealed... one thing stands apparent to every American.

No one is being held accountable.

What I mean by this:  every citizen knows that if they did any one of these crimes, "Perjury to Congress", "Contempt of Congress" as examples - they would find themselves behind bars for a long time. Yet we see on a daily basis, members of this administration lying to Congress, refusing to provide information Congress demands, delaying the production of information Congress demands... and no one is locked up. They are all walking around scot-free.

I submit Congress itself is destroying the system of checks and balances by not immediately holding them accountable - by locking them up when they refuse to answer or refuse to provide the information Congress demands.

I submit Congress is creating precedent that will be continually followed by every member of this administration who does not wish their agenda revealed to the public and Congress.

Gentlemen, I am not claiming yourselves are the ones doing this - please take no offense. However, I firmly believe you would discover if Congress started locking them up - they would start talking and you probably would not be able to shut them up. All of you certainly have friends on the other side of the isle... they are not necessarily bad just because they are Democrats. It might be a very good time to start trying to convince them this Executive Branch overreach directly pertains to them and their well-being, that following a political agenda simply because it originated in their party - might not be the smartest thing to do for long-term career goals.

It is already apparent to anyone who is listening to all of this that our Nation is in the midst of a coup. No, we do not wear tin-foil hats and yes, according to one member of Congress we are all "Whacko Birds".

So be it. If that is the description we carry, we will shoulder that (yet I reiterate we do not wear tin-foil hats). What we desire of our elected is action - not words, not letters. We want our Constitutional Republic government back, we want our freedom back. We want this administration removed in its entirety and our government restored. All of you have a place in that and yes, I voted for all three of you. I will do so again, but that might prove difficult if this agenda of President Obama's continues to play out to the obvious ending.

Respectfully,

Aubrey Mason

San Antonio, Texas

cc:

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott

The Honorable Congressman Stockman

The Honorable Senator Paul

Chairman, House Judicial Committee, The Honorable Congressman Bob Good latté