> Fred was driving home from one of his business
> trips, in Northern Arizona, when he saw an elderly Navajo
> man walking on the side of the road.
> As the trip was a long and quiet one, he stopped
> the car and asked the Navajo man if he would like a
> ride.
> With a silent nod of thanks, the Indian got into
> the car.
> Resuming the journey, Fred tried - in vain - to
> make a bit of small talk with the Navajo man.
> The old man just sat silently, looking intently at
> everything he saw, studying every little detail, until he
> noticed a brown bag on the seat next to Fred.
> "What in bag?" asked the old
> man.
> Fred looked down at the brown bag and said:
> "It's a bottle of wine. I got it for my
> wife."
> The Navajo man was silent for another moment or
> two.
> Then, speaking with the quiet wisdom of an elder,
> he said:
> "Good Trade."
>
FBI agents working alongside Utah state prosecutors in a wide-ranging corruption investigation have uncovered accusations of wrongdoing by two of the U.S. Senates most prominent figures Majority Leader Harry Reid and rising Republican Sen. Mike Lee but the Justice Department has thwarted their bid to launch a full federal investigation.
PHOTOS: Assault rifles: See the best and the baddest
The probe, conducted by one Republican and one Democratic state prosecutor in Utah, has received accusations from an indicted businessman and political donor, interviewed other witnesses and gathered preliminary evidence such as financial records, Congressional Record statements and photographs that corroborate some aspects of the accusations, officials have told The Washington Times and ABC News.
But the Justice Departments public integrity section which normally handles corruption cases involving elected figures rejected FBI agents bid to use a federal grand jury and subpoenas to determine whether the accusations are true and whether any federal crimes were committed by state and federal officials.
The information involving Mr. Reid and Mr. Lee is not fully developed but centers on two primary issues:
Whether both or either politician sought or received money or other benefits from donors and/or fundraisers in connection with doing political favors or taking official actions.
Whether Mr. Lee provided accurate information when he bought, then sold a Utah home for a big loss to a campaign contributor and federal contractor, leaving his mortgage bank to absorb large losses.
There are allegations, but they are very serious allegations and they need to be looked at by somebody, Sim Gill, a Democrat who is the elected chief prosecutor in Salt Lake County, told The Times. If true, or even if asserted, they truly should be investigated and put to rest, or be confirmed.
PHOTOS: Top 10 handguns in the U.S.
Spokesmen for both senators denied their bosses engaged in any wrongdoing and said the lawmakers were unaware of the investigations.
Mass recusal
The investigative efforts have been further complicated by the fact that Mr. Reid worked to get Mr. Lees chief counsel, David Barlow, confirmed in 2011 as the U.S. attorney in Salt Lake City. That action a Democratic Senate leader letting a Republican be named to a key prosecutors position in the Obama administration raised many eyebrows and angered some Democrats.
Be careful what you say. Be careful what you write.
President Obama has just given himself the authority to seize your assets.
According to the presidents recent Executive Order, Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Situation in Ukraine (first reported by WNDs Aaron Klein), the provisions for seizure of property extend to any United States person. That means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.
Declaring a national emergency over the planned referendum in Crimea to determine whether or not to join Russia, the US president asserts that asset seizure is possible for any US person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State:
(i) to be responsible for or complicit in, or to have engaged in, directly or indirectly, any of the following:
(A) actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in Ukraine;
(B) actions or policies that threaten the peace, security, stability, sovereignty, or territorial integrity of Ukraine; or
(C) misappropriation of state assets of Ukraine or of an economically significant entity in Ukraine;
The Executive Order is, as usual, so broadly written that it leaves nearly everything open to interpretation.
For example, what are direct or indirectactions or policies that threaten the peace, security, stability, sovereignty, or territorial integrity of Ukraine? Could that be someone writing an article that takes issue with the US policy that the Crimea referendum is illegal and illegitimate? Could it be standing up in a public meeting and expressing the view that Ukraine would be better off with nationwide referenda to determine whether other regions should become autonomous or joined to neighboring countries? What if a Polish-American appears on a radio or television program suggesting that parts of Poland incorporated into Ukraine after WWII should be returned to Polish authority?
Probably the president will not seize the assets of Americans in the scenarios above. But he says he can.
Explain to me, why we are using AMERICAN TAXPAYER money and US troops to police international water for the LIBYANS??
Navy SEALs have boarded and taken command of an oil tanker that was seized by three armed men at a Libyan port earlier this month, thwarting an attempt by a splinter militia group from selling nationalized Libyan oil on the black market.
A Pentagon spokesman said that the operation was carried out Sunday night on orders from President Obama in international waters southeast of Cyprus, at the request of the Libyan and Cypriot governments. There were no casualties. The USS Roosevelt provided an embarkation point for the SEALs as well as helicopter support and served as a command and control and support platform.
This happened at Berkeley!! The most Liberal place there is.
BERKELEY, Calif. Delivering a rare speech for a Republican at this bastion of liberalism, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul on Wednesday was given multiple standing ovations by the left-wing audience after railing against government surveillance and warning the students: Your right to privacy is under assault.
A parking ticket, traffic citation or involvement in a minor fender-bender are enough to get a person's name and other personal information logged into a massive, obscure federal database run by the U.S. military.
The Law Enforcement Information Exchange, or LinX, has already amassed 506.3 million law enforcement records ranging from criminal histories and arrest reports to field information cards filled out by cops on the beat even when no crime has occurred.
"That may be where you are starting to cross the line on mass collection of information on innocent people just because you can."
LinX is a national information-sharing hub for federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. It is run by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, raising concerns among some military law experts that putting such detailed data about ordinary citizens in the hands of military officials crosses the line that generally prohibits the armed forces from conducting civilian law enforcement operations.
The first phase of a three-year plan by Arizona wildlife officials to bolster herds of bighorn sheep has resulted in the death of half the population, after the 31 sheep were transplanted at a cost of $150,000 into the Catalina Mountains where mountain lions killed 15 of the protected species within a few months.
I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognize the good of others as a justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life.- Hank Rearden
The organizers of a Fourth of July celebration in Longview, Texas, have decided to pay rocker-turned-conservative activist Ted Nugent $16,000 to not appear at their holiday music event as planned, according to KLTV.
Preparing to hold its second annual Fourth of July festival at the Maude Cobb Convention Center, event organizers contacted several artists in hopes of booking them for the date. One of those artists was rocker Ted Nugent with whom the event planners had reached a verbal agreement
However, Nugent has become increasingly more controversial during his stint campaigning for Texas gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott, causing the organizers to reconsider the performers appearance.
Faced with a guaranteed performance fee of $32,000, the City of Longview instead agreed to pay Nugent $16,000 out of the Maude Cobb annual budget to not appear.
Nugent has recently come under fire for, among other things, using Nazi imagery to refer to President Barack Obama as a subhuman mongrel, drawing criticism from Texas Republicans, including Governor Rick Perry and Senator Ted Cruz.
Paul Joseph Watson Infowars.com
March 24, 2014
Leaked Homeland Security documents obtained by Infowars reveal details of a joint DHS/FEMA national exercise set to take place this week, one of the components of which revolves around an effort to counter online dissent by a group called Free Americans Against Socialist Tyranny, which is disgruntled at the imposition of martial law after an earthquake in Alaska.
Image: DHS (Wiki Commons).
The document again underscores the federal governments obsession with characterizing libertarians and conservatives as some kind of extremist radical threat.
The document (PDF) was leaked by an individual affiliated with Stewart Rhodes Oathkeepers organization and passed on to Infowars. It is entitled National Exercise Program Capstone Exercise 2014 Scenario Ground Truth.
The document is intended for U.S. Department of Homeland Security Trusted Agents Only and is disseminated only on a
need-to-know basis. Even the role players involved in the exercise itself are prohibited from seeing the files.
The exercise is designed to evaluate readiness in preparation for a catastrophic incident, natural disaster or major act of terrorism. Some of the scenarios which will be in play during the exercise include a series of earthquakes, tsunamis and a nuclear weapons accident.
On page 125 of the document, a scenario is outlined whereby a group calling itself Free Americans against Socialist Tyranny responds to The U.S. Northern Command mission of Defense Support to Civil Authorities (or the imposition of martial law) by launching a protest campaign on social media and potentially engaging in cyber attacks.
According to the scenario, the campaign is driven by suspicion that the government is responsible for the Alaska earthquake and a hacktivist manifesto.
The U.S. Northern Command mission of Defense Support to Civil Authorities has led to increased activity by some anti-government organizations, states the document. Currently, the most vocal organization is Free Americans against Socialist Tyranny; using social media, they advertise anti-U.S. rhetoric focusing on the Department of Defense as well as to recruit like-minded individuals to join their cause.
While some Free Americans against Socialist Tyranny members are capable of conducting adverse cyber operations, the greatest threat is current government employees sympathetic to their cause, the document adds. It is believed that there are employees within US Northern Command, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army, National Guard, and Defense Information Systems Agency that may support Free Americans against Socialist Tyranny doctrine based on individual comments on social media sites. Free Americans against Socialist Tyranny sympathizers may include both former and current members of the military with training on satellite communications, computer network defense, network operations, as well as military command and control.
The scenario also suggests that Northern Command members sympathetic to Free Americans Against Socialist Tyranny may attempt to hack the North American Aerospace Defense Command as a form of retaliation.
I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognize the good of others as a justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life.- Hank Rearden
Tim, the difference in that video, and one from the Hood, is that was a fair fight. Reverse the roles, and the whole group would have been on the "Honky"
That was an old fashioned beat down. Runnin' your mouth will get you hurt.
__________________
I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognize the good of others as a justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life.- Hank Rearden
Epic Fail: If Government gets any bigger, society will collapse in upon itself.
"For the first time in American history, non-whites will make up half or more of the next generation, likely pushing Washington toward a bigger government and the GOP better tone down their anti-government rhetoric if they want to win them, according to a top polling outfit.
At a briefing for congressional aides hosted by the moderate Republican Ripon Society, Pew Research Vice President Michael Dimock said that the trend among younger Americans is support for government programs and acceptance of Democratic Party policies.
Their tendency is more liberal, their tendency is bigger government, he said of so-called millennials born between 1979 and 1995. They will likely set the trend for the still-unnamed next generation.
This is a generation that is 41 percent non-white; the generation behind it is likely to be close to 50 if not more than 50 percent non-white, and the anti-government kind of tone is one that really doesnt resonate with that non-white sector in particular, said Dimock at the Ripon retre
His advice to the GOP: Try to take as much of the anti-government rhetoric out.
In what critics are describing as a government land grab, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a change Tuesday to the Clean Water Act that would give it regulatory authority over temporary wetlands and waterways.
The proposal immediately sparked concerns that the regulatory power could extend into seasonal ponds, streams and ditches, including those on private property.
"The ... rule may be one of the most significant private property grabs in U.S. history," said Louisiana Sen. David Vitter, the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
The EPA proposal would apply pollution regulations to the country's so-called "intermittent and ephemeral streams and wetlands" -- which are created during wet seasons, or simply after it rains, but are temporary.
At issue is whether the smaller streams and wetlands are indeed part of the "waters of the United States."
The Supreme Court ruled on the issue in 2001 and 2006. The second ruling restricted the federal government's authority by stating such waters must be "relatively" permanent or continuously flowing and sizeable, like "oceans, rivers, streams and lakes."
In defending the proposed change, the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers said Tuesday that determining Clean Water Act protection for streams and wetlands became "confusing and complex" following the high court decisions.
"For nearly a decade, members of Congress, state and local officials, industry, agriculture, environmental groups, and the public asked for a rulemaking to provide clarity," the agencies said in a joint statement.
They also argued such waters "form the foundation of the nation's water resources" and the changes would not extend the federal government's reach. "To be clear, our proposal does not add to or expand the scope of the waters historically protected under the Clean Water Act," EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said in a video accompanying the announcement.
The EPA also said roughly 60 percent of "stream miles" in the country only flow seasonally or after rain but have a "considerable impact" on downstream waters -- and that about 117 million Americans, or one in three, get their drinking water from public systems that rely in part on such streams.
The proposal is now subject to a 90-day comment period in which federal officials vowed to conduct a "robust" public outreach effort that will include discussions across the country to gather the input needed "to shape a final rule." The agencies said the proposed change is supported by the latest peer-reviewed science.
However, Vitter accused the EPA of "picking and choosing" its science while trying to "take another step toward outright permitting authority over virtually any wet area in the country."
He also warned the proposed change, if approved, would open the door for more environmental groups suing private property owners.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, echoed those concerns, saying the change "could result in serious collateral damage to our economy."
"[I]t appears that the EPA is seeking to dramatically expand its jurisdictional reach under the Clean Water Act," she said in a statement. The senator added that the change could have a huge impact on Alaska.
"If EPA is not careful, this rule could effectively give the federal government control of nearly all of our state -- and prove to be a showstopper for both traditional access and new development," she said.
Moral of the story? If youre going to go all racial, never call someone a white dude unless youre absolutely sure he is one.
This memorandum was released by the Republican National Committee just after 4 p.m. today in response to Jamilah Lemieux, the EBONY Magazine senior editor who went a little haywire on Twitter Thursday, saying she had no desire to listen to a white conservative dude like Raffi Williams, deputy flack at the RNC. Indeed, she told him to shut up! (See the whole brutal but kinda hilarious conversation here.)
Except, of course, hes black and the son of FNCs liberal commentator Juan Williams.
I saw that. She must not be the sharpest knife in the Ebony drawer. Seriously, his name is Raffi and his Dad is Juan Williams. Really ? Actually I think this is the new way for them to cry out Uncle Tom.
__________________
I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognize the good of others as a justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life.- Hank Rearden
WASHINGTON Momentum is building behind what would be an unprecedented effort to amend the U.S. Constitution, through a little-known provision that gives states rather than Congress the power to initiate changes.
At issue is what's known as a "constitutional convention," a scenario tucked into Article V of the U.S. Constitution. At its core, Article V provides two ways for amendments to be proposed. The first which has been used for all 27 amendment to date requires two-thirds of both the House and Senate to approve a resolution, before sending it to the states for ratification. The Founding Fathers, though, devised an alternative way which says if two-thirds of state legislatures demand a meeting, Congress shall call a convention for proposing amendments.
The idea has gained popularity among constitutional scholars in recent years -- but got a big boost last week when Michigan lawmakers endorsed it.
Michigan matters, because by some counts it was the 34th state to do so. That makes two-thirds.
In the wake of the vote, California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter pressed House Speaker John Boehner on Tuesday to determine whether the states just crossed the threshold for this kind of convention. Like Michigan lawmakers, Hunter's interest in the matter stems from a desire to push a balanced-budget amendment -- something that could potentially be done at a constitutional convention.
Based on several reports and opinions, Michigan might be the 34th state to issue such a call and therefore presents the constitutionally-required number of states to begin the process of achieving a balanced budget amendment, Hunter wrote.
With the recent decision by Michigan lawmakers, it is important that the House and those of us who support a balanced budget amendment -- determine whether the necessary number of states have acted and the appropriate role of Congress should this be the case."
If two-thirds of the states indeed have applied, the ball is presumably in Congress' court to call the convention.
But Article V is rather vague, and it's ultimately unclear whether 34 states have technically applied. In the past, states like Oregon, Utah and Arizona have quietly voted to approve the provision in their legislature.
But some of the 34 or so have rescinded their requests. Others have rescinded, and then re-applied.
Alabama rescinded its request in 1988 but in 2011, lawmakers again applied for a convention related to an amendment requiring that the federal budget be balanced. It was a similar story in Florida in 2010.
Louisiana rescinded in 1990 but lawmakers have tried several times, unsuccessfully, to reinstate the application since then.
It's unclear whether the applications still count in these scenarios.
Some constitutional scholars like Gregory Watson, an analyst in Texas, say once states ask, there may be no take-backs.
There is a disagreement among scholars as to whether a state that has approved an application may later rescind that application, Watson told The Washington Times. If it is ultimately adjudicated that a state may not rescind a prior application, then Ohios 2013 application for a Balanced Budget Amendment convention would be the 33rd and Michigans 2014 application would be the 34th on that topic.
Others say if a state changes its mind, it can no longer be part of the 34.
Even if the requisite number of states have applied, questions remain about how such a convention would work -- and whether, as Michigan wants, such a convention could be limited to only discussing a balanced-budget amendment.
It still may be a long shot, but some analysts are warning about the unintended consequences of such a move.
In Louisiana, Budget Project Policy Analyst Steve Spire argued against the state's resolution, saying the convention could permanently damage the nations political system.
The last time there was a successful amendment was more than four decades ago the 26th Amendment which changed the voting age to 18. States ratified the 27th Amendment on congressional pay increases, but it took more than 200 years to do it.
INDIANAPOLIS FBI agents have seized thousands of artifacts from Native Americans, Russia, China, and other nations from a 91-year-old man's private collection in rural central Indiana.
The items, which also came from Haiti, Australia, New Guinea and Peru, were collected by Donald Miller of Waldron over eight decades, FBI Special Agent Robert Jones said at a news conference.
"The cultural value of these artifacts is immeasurable," Jones said while refusing to disclose details of any of the individual items taken from Miller's property.
Some items were acquired improperly, but Miller, who traveled extensively, obtained others legally or before laws affecting them were on the books, Jones said. Federal authorities will attempt to repatriate items with their rightful owners, he said.
Miller told CBS News that he "absolutely" has rightful ownership of the artifacts and that he was cooperating with the FBI's investigation.
"I have been in 200 countries collecting artifacts," he said.
It was unclear whether he would face any criminal charges, Jones said.
Video shot from television helicopters showed an FBI command vehicle and several tents at Miller's property, about 35 miles southeast of Indiana.
Miller stored the items in several buildings on his property.
Andi Essex, a neighbor, told WISH-TV that when her company performed work on Millers home a few years ago, they were so mesmerized by his collection they wanted to come back.
It was crazy stuff like that. But, its unreal. The full skeleton is what blew my mind and the Indiana artifacts that he had, Essex told the station.
Larry Zimmerman, a professor of anthropology and museum studies and one of several experts assisting agents in cataloging and preserving the collection, said the quality of the items was variable but Miller had maintained them in good condition.
"I have never seen a collection like this in my life except in some of the largest museums," Zimmerman said.
As the items were assembled over several decades, it will likely take a lot of time to determine the age and origin of all of them.
"Mr. Miller has made an attempt to safeguard and protect the items," Jones said.
WISH-TV reported that Miller was also a local teacher and was involved in the Manhattan Project to build the atomic bomb during World War II.
Hes just a very interesting, interesting guy, Essex said.
This reminds me of something that I was told about years ago. I have an effigy pipe that is likely from the Hopewell period. In very good shape. I was asking some folks about it and mentioned that maybe I should take it up to Indy to the Eiteljorg Museum and have their experts look at it. One guy told me not to do that as he had taken something up there years previous. They told him to leave it and they would study it. The next time he saw it it was in the museum with a reference number on it. They actually told him it was not his any longer and really was never his, it was the publics and needed to be in a museum. That's the "academician" view of the world. My guess is it's something like this that's happening to this guy.
__________________
I do not seek the good of others as a sanction for my right to exist, nor do I recognize the good of others as a justification for their seizure of my property or their destruction of my life.- Hank Rearden
Years ago, a guy in Florida was going broke in the sea salvage business. He got lucky, and found a spanish gallion with artifacts and much gold. The state immediately claimed it, and then fought with Spain over the gold. The poor bastard only received a fraction of it's worth. I would melt the gold coins (illegal) and never tell a soul.
Federal Snipers Train Guns on Family For Filming Cattle
Man arrested for expressing free speech outside of designated First Amendment Area
Paul Joseph Watson Infowars.com
April 7, 2014
Federal snipers with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) trained guns on members of a family yesterday after they dared to stop and take video footage of cattle outside the bounds of a designated First Amendment Area, before arresting one of the men for non-compliance.
The cattle were being rounded up by BLM officers as part of a crackdown on Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who has refused to pay grazing fees demanded by the feds as a result of a re-classification of 600,000 acres of federal land in northeastern Clark County which Bundy claims has been in his family for generations.
Some fear the dispute could turn into a Ruby Ridge-style violent standoff because Bundy has said he is prepared to become a martyr for what he perceives as a constitutional stance against tyranny.
As we reported earlier, the feds have now started rounding up Bundys cattle in the name of protecting a supposedly endangered species, the desert tortoise, forbidding Bundy from interfering or even entering the vast area. The case is quickly turning into another iconic battle between big government and a besieged family.
Fears that the confrontation may turn violent and concerns that Bundy is drawing increased support from liberty activists and the local community prompted the feds to tape off two ridiculous First Amendment Areas, outside of which free speech in support of Bundy is banned. A sign placed inside the area reads Welcome to Amerika Wake Up alongside a hammer and sickle logo.
When Bundys family members violated that rule yesterday in an attempt to peacefully document the cattle roundup, they were met with a barrage of loudspeaker warnings and four BLM snipers with their guns trained on the dissenters.
Several members of the family had gone out for a drive in several vehicles to try to monitor the ongoing federal action to remove their fathers cattle from the range, reports the Moapa Valley Progress. They were not travelling on recently restricted federal land, but were travelling along the state highway looking north across the valley for signs of cattle, Ryan Bundy said.
He was doing nothing but standing there and filming the landscape, Bundy said of his brother Dave. We were on the state highway, not even off of the right-of-way. Even if they want to call [the area that we were filming] federal land; which its not; we werent even on it. We were on the road.
None of the family members were armed, but as soon as Dave Bundy began filming the cattle in the distance, 11 BLM vehicles each with two agents arrived and surrounded him.
They also had four snipers on the hill above us all trained on us. We were doing nothing besides filming the area, said Ryan Bundy.
The family were told to leave the area via loudspeaker because they had violated the crudely established First Amendment Area.
They said that we had no first amendment rights except for up by the bridge where they had established an area for that, Bundy said.
When Dave Bundy didnt immediately heed the warning and return to his vehicle, a dog was set on him and he was subsequently arrested.
He was filming and talking on the phone, I dont know to whom, Ryan Bundy said. It happened pretty fast. They came down on him hard and had a German Shepherd on him. And then they took him.
When Dave Bundys father Cliven attempted to contact emergency response in both Mesquite and for Metro in an attempt to discover the whereabouts of his son, he was told to, get off the phone or he would be arrested, according to Ryan Bundy.
Should the Bundy case escalate any further, what has up to this point remained a largely local news story threatens to explode into a national controversy re-igniting resentment over big government and a federal bureaucracy increasingly trampling on the rights of the American people to be left alone.