Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
If you were born in this great country of ours, than work for this country and not State of Israel.Don't work for AIPAC, they just want our money and our technology to be transferred to Israel. We should be fair to Islamic countries and not kill their citizen with our money and weapons. Jews have been unfaithful to this country and wherever they have lived. You fucking idiot and also a faggot
Attorney For Tea Party Group Caught Suppressing Evidence Of Islamic Terror Funding In Client’s Battle With IRS
by Ben Barrack on August 2, 2014 in Featured, General, Malik Obama
In True the Vote (TTV) v. IRS, the crux of the case involves the targeting of conservative groups for increased scrutiny and undue harassment while simultaneously delaying the issuance of tax-exempt status for years. TTV’s attorney Cleta Mitchell is suppressing evidence that would help her client. We know because we walked her office through it back in February.
The exact opposite of being targeted for mistreatment by the IRS is being treated with extreme favor by it. That issue becomes even more significant when an entity that received such favorable (and illegal) treatment by the IRS is connected to terrorism.
It’s not sufficient to show how conservative groups were targeted and liberal groups were not, especially when evidence exists that a group whose founder has ties to terrorism was treated with tremendous and undue favor. This raises the stakes and makes the case even better.
In short, the evidence being suppressed involves an entity founded in April of 2008. This foundation sought to solicit tax-free donations via 501(c)(3) status. However, the paperwork necessary for obtaining that status wasn’t filed until May of 2011 and only after a legal watchdog demanded an investigation. The IRS went into high gear and granted the foundation its tax-exempt status in less than 30 days. The date stamped on the approval letter bearing the signature of Lois Lerner is June 26, 2011 – a SUNDAY.
Moreover, Lerner backdated the approval to April 30, 2008, a full 38 months. It is a crime for a foundation to solicit tax-free donations without tax-exempt status for more than 27 months. What should get Lerner into even more hot water is that the president of this foundation is a U.S. resident (not a citizen) but has expressed solidarity with Hamas (an officially designated terror organization) and is the Executive Secretary for an Islamic organization overseen by a wanted international war criminal who is the President of a country officially designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism by the U.S. State Department.
Providing further contrast is that TTV filed for 501(c)(3) status in July of 2010. 38 months later, that status was granted. However, unlike the other foundation, TTV followed the law and was awarded that status only after the IRS had a bigger problem on its hands than it realized and attempted to get TTV to drop the lawsuit in exchange for granting that status.
To TTV’s credit, it did not drop the suit.
Cleta Mitchell
Mitchell, a partner with Foley and Lardner, based in Washington, DC is the public face of the plaintiff’s legal team. However, TTV v. IRS was filed by the ActRight Legal Foundation in Plainfield, IN. When it comes to media interviews and issuing Congressional testimony, Mitchell is the go-to person. She sits on the Board of ActRight.
As Shoebat.com reported this week, the shocking revelation – courtesy of released emails – that Lerner thinks people like Engelbrecht are worse than “terrorists” and should be considered “assholes”, provided a golden opportunity for even more contrast.
Yet, when appearing on the Fox News Channel to discuss these emails, Mitchell avoided that contrast entirely. In so doing, she suppressed evidence from being introduced into the court of public opinion and hampered her client’s case. In this exchange, Mitchell makes the claim that Lerner was “intentionally biased” without delivering the roundhouse kick provided by the aforementioned example.
Ironically, Mitchell even admits that Attorney General Eric Holder will not prosecute complicit parties who harmed her client. She then rightfully claims that “they don’t want the truth out”.
Et tu, Ms. Mitchell?
One day earlier, at a House Oversight Committee hearing, Mitchell had another opportunity to introduce the explosive evidence that would help her client. She refused to do so. Below are two clips from the same hearing. In the first, Mitchell attempts to point out a disparity in the treatment of progressive groups and tea party groups without providing the most explosive example, an example she is suppressing:
Here is Mitchell at the same hearing. In this exchange, she might as well attempt to catch missiles with a butterfly net. She’s on the right side and makes the right charge but completely avoiding the right argument. After being asked if she thinks IRS reforms can be implemented, Mitchell responds by saying:
“I think the application process is completely broken.”
What better way to demonstrate this than pointing to Lerner giving illegally retroactive and expeditious 501(c)(3) status to a foundation whose president is connected to terrorism?
So what is the name of the foundation and its President that Mitchell will not name? The Barack H. Obama Foundation (BHOF) and its President Malik Obama, the brother of the President of the United States.
The IRS scandal and investigation is at a stalemate and Mitchell has the opportunity to put the IRS and its Congressional Democrat allies in checkmate.
Currently, Democrats are running interference for the administration by conceding that conservative groups were targeted but that it wasn’t political, it can be remedied with reform and that no special prosecutor is needed. Republicans and people like Mitchell argue that the targeting was political and that the accountability of individuals involved can only be accomplished with a special prosecutor.
By introducing the IRS’s treatment of Malik Obama into the scandal – Mitchell has the ability to do this – the Democrat congressmen who are currently defending the IRS will be forced to defend allegations that the IRS is funding terrorism.
Even the Democrats would have a tough time making that case just three months out of an election.
It is difficult to know why Mitchell is deciding to suppress evidence that would greatly help her client and the country but does have a history of running interference for sympathizers of stealth jihadists (Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan respectively), most notably during her time with the American Conservative Union (ACU) and the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC); both Norquist and Khan have held leadership roles there. Mitchell was made aware of their irrefutable connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and not only dismissed them but quite shockingly, smeared the messenger while doing so.
Mitchell’s ties to Norquist are extensive, as relayed by Shoebat.com.
On August 29, 2013, House Ways and Means Committee member, Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) referred to the evidence Mitchell is suppressing as “Spot on” twice during a radio town hall in his district:
Note: In the context of this post, ‘suppression of evidence’ is not necessarily meant to apply to court proceedings. It is not known if TTV’s attorneys have attempted to introduce this evidence in court and it was subsequently ruled inadmissable. When it comes to Mitchell, she is suppressing evidence in the much more powerful court of public opinion by not introducing it via media interviews or in Congressional testimony.
An email sent to ActRight Legal for comment on this matter was not answered prior to publishing this article. We will keep this post updated if we receive a response.
In short, the evidence being suppressed involves an entity founded in April of 2008. This foundation sought to solicit tax-free donations via 501(c)(3) status. However, the paperwork necessary for obtaining that status wasn’t filed until May of 2011 and only after a legal watchdog demanded an investigation. The IRS went into high gear and granted the foundation its tax-exempt status in less than 30 days. The date stamped on the approval letter bearing the signature of Lois Lerner is June 26, 2011 – a SUNDAY.
Moreover, Lerner backdated the approval to April 30, 2008, a full 38 months. It is a crime for a foundation to solicit tax-free donations without tax-exempt status for more than 27 months. What should get Lerner into even more hot water is that the president of this foundation is a U.S. resident (not a citizen) but has expressed solidarity with Hamas (an officially designated terror organization) and is the Executive Secretary for an Islamic organization overseen by a wanted international war criminal who is the President of a country officially designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism by the U.S. State Department..
Attorney For Tea Party Group Caught Suppressing Evidence Of Islamic Terror Funding In Client’s Battle With IRS
by Ben Barrack on August 2, 2014 in Featured, General, Malik Obama
In True the Vote (TTV) v. IRS, the crux of the case involves the targeting of conservative groups for increased scrutiny and undue harassment while simultaneously delaying the issuance of tax-exempt status for years. TTV’s attorney Cleta Mitchell is suppressing evidence that would help her client. We know because we walked her office through it back in February.
The exact opposite of being targeted for mistreatment by the IRS is being treated with extreme favor by it. That issue becomes even more significant when an entity that received such favorable (and illegal) treatment by the IRS is connected to terrorism.
It’s not sufficient to show how conservative groups were targeted and liberal groups were not, especially when evidence exists that a group whose founder has ties to terrorism was treated with tremendous and undue favor. This raises the stakes and makes the case even better.
In short, the evidence being suppressed involves an entity founded in April of 2008. This foundation sought to solicit tax-free donations via 501(c)(3) status. However, the paperwork necessary for obtaining that status wasn’t filed until May of 2011 and only after a legal watchdog demanded an investigation. The IRS went into high gear and granted the foundation its tax-exempt status in less than 30 days. The date stamped on the approval letter bearing the signature of Lois Lerner is June 26, 2011 – a SUNDAY.
Moreover, Lerner backdated the approval to April 30, 2008, a full 38 months. It is a crime for a foundation to solicit tax-free donations without tax-exempt status for more than 27 months. What should get Lerner into even more hot water is that the president of this foundation is a U.S. resident (not a citizen) but has expressed solidarity with Hamas (an officially designated terror organization) and is the Executive Secretary for an Islamic organization overseen by a wanted international war criminal who is the President of a country officially designated as a State Sponsor of Terrorism by the U.S. State Department.
Providing further contrast is that TTV filed for 501(c)(3) status in July of 2010. 38 months later, that status was granted. However, unlike the other foundation, TTV followed the law and was awarded that status only after the IRS had a bigger problem on its hands than it realized and attempted to get TTV to drop the lawsuit in exchange for granting that status.
To TTV’s credit, it did not drop the suit.
Cleta Mitchell
Mitchell, a partner with Foley and Lardner, based in Washington, DC is the public face of the plaintiff’s legal team. However, TTV v. IRS was filed by the ActRight Legal Foundation in Plainfield, IN. When it comes to media interviews and issuing Congressional testimony, Mitchell is the go-to person. She sits on the Board of ActRight.
As Shoebat.com reported this week, the shocking revelation – courtesy of released emails – that Lerner thinks people like Engelbrecht are worse than “terrorists” and should be considered “assholes”, provided a golden opportunity for even more contrast.
Yet, when appearing on the Fox News Channel to discuss these emails, Mitchell avoided that contrast entirely. In so doing, she suppressed evidence from being introduced into the court of public opinion and hampered her client’s case. In this exchange, Mitchell makes the claim that Lerner was “intentionally biased” without delivering the roundhouse kick provided by the aforementioned example.
Ironically, Mitchell even admits that Attorney General Eric Holder will not prosecute complicit parties who harmed her client. She then rightfully claims that “they don’t want the truth out”.
Et tu, Ms. Mitchell?
One day earlier, at a House Oversight Committee hearing, Mitchell had another opportunity to introduce the explosive evidence that would help her client. She refused to do so. Below are two clips from the same hearing. In the first, Mitchell attempts to point out a disparity in the treatment of progressive groups and tea party groups without providing the most explosive example, an example she is suppressing:
Here is Mitchell at the same hearing. In this exchange, she might as well attempt to catch missiles with a butterfly net. She’s on the right side and makes the right charge but completely avoiding the right argument. After being asked if she thinks IRS reforms can be implemented, Mitchell responds by saying:
“I think the application process is completely broken.”
What better way to demonstrate this than pointing to Lerner giving illegally retroactive and expeditious 501(c)(3) status to a foundation whose president is connected to terrorism?
So what is the name of the foundation and its President that Mitchell will not name? The Barack H. Obama Foundation (BHOF) and its President Malik Obama, the brother of the President of the United States.
The IRS scandal and investigation is at a stalemate and Mitchell has the opportunity to put the IRS and its Congressional Democrat allies in checkmate.
Currently, Democrats are running interference for the administration by conceding that conservative groups were targeted but that it wasn’t political, it can be remedied with reform and that no special prosecutor is needed. Republicans and people like Mitchell argue that the targeting was political and that the accountability of individuals involved can only be accomplished with a special prosecutor.
By introducing the IRS’s treatment of Malik Obama into the scandal – Mitchell has the ability to do this – the Democrat congressmen who are currently defending the IRS will be forced to defend allegations that the IRS is funding terrorism.
Even the Democrats would have a tough time making that case just three months out of an election.
It is difficult to know why Mitchell is deciding to suppress evidence that would greatly help her client and the country but does have a history of running interference for sympathizers of stealth jihadists (Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan respectively), most notably during her time with the American Conservative Union (ACU) and the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC); both Norquist and Khan have held leadership roles there. Mitchell was made aware of their irrefutable connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and not only dismissed them but quite shockingly, smeared the messenger while doing so.
Mitchell’s ties to Norquist are extensive, as relayed by Shoebat.com.
On August 29, 2013, House Ways and Means Committee member, Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) referred to the evidence Mitchell is suppressing as “Spot on” twice during a radio town hall in his district:
Note: In the context of this post, ‘suppression of evidence’ is not necessarily meant to apply to court proceedings. It is not known if TTV’s attorneys have attempted to introduce this evidence in court and it was subsequently ruled inadmissable. When it comes to Mitchell, she is suppressing evidence in the much more powerful court of public opinion by not introducing it via media interviews or in Congressional testimony.
An email sent to ActRight Legal for comment on this matter was not answered prior to publishing this article. We will keep this post updated if we receive a response.
If you were born in this great country of ours, than work for this country and not State of Israel.Don't work for AIPAC, they just want our money and our technology to be transferred to Israel. We should be fair to Islamic countries and not kill their citizen with our money and weapons. Jews have been unfaithful to this country and wherever they have lived. You fucking idiot and also a faggot
From Northern Iraq to Northeastern Syria, from Nairobi, Kenya to Benghazi, Libya, from Lahore, Pakistan to the rugged mountains of Mali and Afghanistan, radical Muslims have executed hundreds of their fellow Muslims and are on a killing rampage against Christians. The world is shocked and distressed.
The Muslims' killing campaign did not end with their defeat at the gates of Vienna. Their eviction from Spain was a temporary forced retreat. But now Muslims have, in huge numbers, penetrated the gates of every city and town in Europe and North America without even having to use their swords.
Distressed by the Muslims’ trouble-making and killing sprees, civilized nations are bending over backwards in the hope of placating them and helping them join the family of humanity by admitting hordes of immigrants and offering them all manner of hospitality and assistance. All these gestures remain in vain and to no avail. Many of the new arrivals, deeply infected by the violent side of the Islamic ethos, find it impossible to assimilate in the host countries. Instead, they strive to impose their own order, which is the cause of their own backwardness and inhumanity in the nations from which they have emigrated.
The non-Muslim world is at its wit’s end. No accommodation or kindness seems to stem the tide of Islamic violence. Countless numbers of proposals have been advanced in dealing with this systemic Islamic disorder. Some feel that, in general, Muslims are law-abiding citizens of their adopted countries and it is only a minority that is responsible for the violence and mayhem. Thinking along these lines has prompted people to say that the solution to Islamic violence rests with Islamic leaders. That is, Islamic leaders should speak up and condemn jihad and jihadists.
Western armchair theorizers and wishful thinkers need to take time and study the Islamic system in order to avoid making demands on Muslim leaders -- demands that will never be met because they are completely unrealistic.
Islam presently has its hold over on over a billion humans, posing an existential threat to all non-Muslims. Islam, yet again, has risen from the ashes of defeat and is on a campaign of conquest throughout the world. Hordes of fanatical Islamic foot soldiers are striving to kill and get killed. What they all want is the opportunity to discharge their homicidal-suicidal impulses, on their way to Allah's promised glorious paradise. And in the background, granting the foot soldiers' wishes, are their handlers, the puppeteers, who pull the strings and detonate these human bombs. Those who cherish life must recognize these emissaries of death -- what makes them, what motivates them, and how best to defend against them.
America, with a long tradition of protecting religious freedom, still clings to the “hands off” practice of leaving alone any doctrine or practice billed as religion. A thorny problem is in deciding what constitutes a religion and who is to make that call. There is a glimmer of hope that the American people are finally waking up to the deceit and the menace. Their opposition to the building of the mosque at Ground Zero showed that the creeping Islamization of America is indeed something to stand against and prevent before it is too late.
As more and more Muslims arrive in America, as they reproduce with great fecundity, as they convert the disenchanted and minorities, and as petrodollar-flush Muslims and Muslim treasuries supply generous funds, they gather more power to mount a serious challenge to the American system of governance, representative democracy. As for democracy, the rule of the people, Muslim theology has no use for it at all. Devout Muslims believe that Allah’s rule must govern the world in the form of a Caliphate, a theocracy. Making a mockery of democracy, subverting its workings, and ignoring its provisions is Islam’s way of falsifying what is already believed to be a sinful and false system of governance invented by infidels.
I have been sounding the alarm for decades about the ever-increasing menace Islam is posing to America and our way of life. Apathy, political correctness, and massive Islamic lobbying have successfully prevented the public from truly grasping the all-pervasive Islamic assault.
Time and again we are told by the politically correct “experts” not to worry about Islam posing a threat to our way of life. We’re also told, not to worry about the horrific things that are happening on the other side of the world! If Muslims act heinously toward non-Muslims, it is just the way things are in those countries and it is hardly any of our business. This is the same attitude that set the Islamization of Europe on a seemingly irreversible track. One European country after another is rapidly buckling under the weight of Islamism.
With heavy assurances like this, coming from so many know-it-all authoritative figures, we can sleep soundly without the aid of sleeping pills. Yet, the problem of aggressive Islam is very real and deadly. Neither the pronouncements of the experts, nor the tranquilizing pills of the mind can make it go away. Islam will continue its bloody conquest, as mandated in the Koran.
The only terrorists discussed in this article are U.S. Muslims who join Islamic jihad groups. But the belief system that leads these men to join such groups is never mentioned — it can be surmised by the reader from the fact that they join groups like “the Islamic State” and take on names like “Abu Omar al Amreeki,” but it is never directly mentioned exactly what kind of terrorists these are. That peculiar omission would never have been made in a news story about “right wing extremists” who are members of “patriot groups,” but it is required here by the politically correct straitjacket that stifles all mainstream media discussion of Islamic jihad. And this omission also ensures that the feds’ attempts to prevent “homegrown terrorists” will always been hamstrung by their inability to speak honestly or investigate in detail what these terrorists believe, and what motivates them to become terrorists in the first place.
“Law enforcement increase effort to prevent threat of homegrown terrorists,” by Christopher Snyder, FoxNews.com, August 12, 2014 (thanks to Kenneth):
In the past few months, federal agents arrested and filed terrorism charges against several Americans, experts say in an effort to prevent homegrown terrorists.
According to the NYPD, more than 100 Americans are possibly training within Al Qaeda-inspired groups like the Islamic State (IS), the militant group formerly known as ISIS operating in Syria and Iraq.
Tom Ruskin, former NYPD detective and president of security consulate firm the CMP Group told Foxnews.com that law enforcement officials are trying to track potential threats overseas before suspected terrorists come stateside.
“It’s a major concern in this country of people coming back or into our country or people who are already here,” Ruskin said.
The latest incident was the arrest of suspected terror supporter Donald Ray Morgan earlier this month in New York.
A spokesperson for prosecutors said the ex-convict was arrested in connection with a North Carolina indictment and charged with “being a felon in possession of firearms.” Authorities also found the suspect had tweeted his loyalty to the leader of the Islamic State using the alias “Abu Omar al Amreeki.”
“We know he has been in possession of illegal guns in the past, very high [levels of] ammunition and the fact that he is tweeting his allegiance to ISIS is of concern to the U.S. government,” Ruskin said.
It might prove to be a tough task for prosecutors to build terror-related charges against Morgan just based on tweets.
“Obviously when came back through [John F.] Kennedy airport, the eastern district U.S. attorney felt that they had enough to prosecute and hold him for the time being,” Ruskin said.
This allows authorities, he points out to do an extensive background check on Morgan’s most recent movements abroad.
“What they are now doing is going through his phone records, computer files, texts, and who he has associated with,” Ruskin said. “They are trying to determine nexus between him and a terrorist group.”
