Michelle Obama: "Fantasy" Is To Walk Out WH "And Just Keep Walking"


"It is hard to sneak around and do what you want," Michelle Obama said today. "I have done it a couple of times. But you know one fantasy I have, and the Secret Service they keep looking at me because they think I might actually do it, is to walk right out the front door and just keep walking."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/04/26/michelle_obama_fantasy_is_to_walk_out_wh_and_just_keep_walking.html 


Let's hope America sends you walking this November...until then Stay classy!

they must have run out of hot wings.... 😟

OBAMA GIVING OIL-RICH ALASKA ISLANDS TO RUSSIA Agreement negotiated in total secrecy without state's participation, public comment Published: 04/14/2012 at 9:01 PM

(WorldNewsTribune) Obama’s State Department is giving away seven strategic,resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes,to the Putin regime in the Kremlin. … The seven endangered islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly,our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement,it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by President Obama or Secretary Clinton.

😱

Why didn't they tell Sarah first..?? 😕

Monsanto’s Food and Drug Administration can’t close down small dairies and private food clubs fast enough, bursting on the scene with guns drawn as if the criminalized right to contract for natural foods we’ve consumed for millennia deserves SWAT attention.

Now, Obama has the Dept. of Justice going after small farmers under the post-911 “Bank Secrecy Act” which makes it a crime to deposit less than $10,000 when you earned more than that.

“The level we deposited was what it was and it was about the same every week,” Randy Sowers told Frederick News. The Sowers own and run South Mountain Creamery in Middletown, Maryland.

Admittedly, when the Sowers earned over $10,000 in February, and learned they’d have to fill out paperwork at the bank for such large deposits, they simply rolled the deposits over to keep them below the none-of-your-****-business amount, rather than waste time on bureaucratic red tape aimed at flagging terrorism or other illegal activities.

“Structuring,” explains Overlawyered.com, “is the federal criminal offense of splitting up bank deposits so as to keep them under a threshold such as $10,000 above which banks have to report transactions to the government.”

While being questioned, the Sowers were finally presented with a seizure order and advised that the feds had already emptied their bank account of $70,000. The Dept. of Justice has since sued to keep $63,000 of the Sowers’ money, though they committed no crime other than maintaining their privacy.

Without funds, they will be unable to make purchases for the spring planting.

When a similar action was taken against Taylor’s Produce Stand last year, the feds seized $90,000, dropped the charges, and kept $45,000 of Taylor’s money.

Knowing that most farms operate on a very thin margin, such abuse of power wipes out a family’s income, and for a bonus, the feds enhance the monopoly power of Monsanto, Big Dairy and their supply chain.

You can just smell attorney Michael Taylor behind all this, Obama’s dairy dog. Who you’ll find, instead, is US district attorney Stefan Cassella. He’s the first to head the DOJ’s Asset Forfeiture & Money Laundering Section, created in 2009, having wrote the books on it. He cut his teeth on seizing $1.2 billion from real money launderer, BCCI. Guess his focus has changed since then.

The Maryland Dept. of Agriculture had no trouble hitting up the Sowers for a recipe in its Buy-Local cookbook; but Cassella must’ve missed that public service, or it’s what drew his attention – “Ah! A small dairy! Let’s rob them of their cash, those evil Big Dairy competitors. They probably sell raw milk under the table. Even if we find no evidence of wrongdoing, we’ll keep their money anyway.” (Cue Curly’s, “yuh, yuh, yuh.”)

City Paper reports that in 2011, “Maryland brought 14 of the nation’s 99 structuring cases, making it the top state for such prosecutions. Nationally, the numbers have been rising; the 2011 figures are up 8.8 percent from the year before and up 57.1 percent from five years ago.”

Funny, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and other criminal banksters are still in operation, despite committing millions of acts of fraud during mortgage reassignations. But the DOJ prioritizes squashing family farmers since it’s easier to pick the low-hanging fruit than do battle with well-financed criminals who’ve illegally seized the homes of millions of US citizens.

Former Maryland assistant U.S. attorney Steven Levin told the paper, “The emphasis is on basically seizing money, whether it is legally or illegally earned. It can lead to financial ruin for business owners, and there’s a potential for abuse here by the government.”

Ya think?

The Bank Secrecy Act was modified* after 9/11, another in a long line of Constitutionally-abhorrent laws enacted by officials who cannot prove they were elected to office (given those elections were held on electronic voting systems that can be hacked without leaving evidence of the crime).

With the current Administration’s Agenda 21 focus on destroying the natural food and herb industry, is it not unsurprising to see unconstitutional terrorist legislation used on innocent, law abiding citizens?

Landmark Lawsuit by US Home Owners

5th May 2012

By Madison Ruppert

Contributing Writer for Wake Up World

A new lawsuit, which is bordering on the unbelievable, implicates the Obama administration and some of the world’s largest banks in the largest international money laundering case in history.

This global money laundering network was allegedly formed during the Obama administration and helped banks rob U.S. home owners through offshore affiliates in infamous tax havens and money laundering hubs like the Cayman Island, Isle of Man, Luxembourg and Malaysia.

A press release published by Marketwatch (a website owned by the Wall Street Journal) via Marketwire on April 23, 2012, by America’s Spire Law Group, revealed that a mass tort action on behalf of home owners across the United States has been filed in the Supreme Court of New York, County of Kings.

The release states that the suit implicates every major bank servicer and their subsidiaries, as well as the Obama administration which allegedly was privately ratifying the formation of shell corporations in violation of not only the USA PATRIOT Act, but also State and Federal law as well.

This is all while the administration was very publicly encouraging home owners to modify their loans.

The suit, which has been assigned Index No. 500827 and was filed by the Spire Law Group and their affiliates and partners throughout the United States, also alleges that Bank of America, J.P. Morgan, Wells Fargo Bank, Citibank, Citigroup, One West Bank, among other federally chartered banks stole hundreds of millions of dollars from U.S. home owners through little-known offshore companies.

The money was then laundered through offshore corporations, and surprisingly the suit is quite explicit in identifying specific companies as well as the countries they are located in which were used to help defraud huge sums of money from Americans.

These activities are violations of the guidelines of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), New York state law, not to mention other states as well as federal law.

Columbus, Ohio-based trial lawyer and author Eric J. Wittenberg made some quite heated statements on behalf of the plaintiffs in the case.

“The laundering of trillions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer money —and the wrongful taking of the homes of those taxpayers — was known by the Administration and expressly supported by it. Evidence uncovered by the plaintiffs revealed that the Administration ignored its own agencies’ reports — and reports from the Department of Homeland Security —about this situation, dating as far back as 2010,” Wittenberg said.

“Worse, the Administration purported to endorse a ‘national bank settlement’ without disclosing or having any public discourse whatsoever about the thousands of foreign tax havens now wholly owned by our nation’s banks. Fortunately, no home owner is bound to enter into this fraudulent bank settlement,” he added.

The many home owners involved in the case are suing these major financial institutions and their foreign allies not only for fraud and larceny but also for conversion and violations of provisions of New York state law and other laws.

If this lawsuit is what they are making it out to be, there could be a great deal of incredibly important information brought to light.

The press release states, “

This lawsuit explains why loans were, in general, rarely modified after 2009. It explains why the entire bank crisis worsened, crippling the economy of the United States and stripping countless home owners of their piece of the American dream. It is indeed a fact that the Administration has spent far more money stopping bank investigations, than they have investigating them. When the Administration’s agencies (like the FDIC) blew the whistle, their reports were ignored.”

“As if it is not bad enough that banks collect money and do not credit it to homeowners’ accounts, and as if it is not bad enough that those banks then foreclose when they know they do not have a legally enforceable interest in the realty, we now learn that they have been operating under unbridled free reign given by the Administration and some states’ Attorneys General in formulating this international money laundering network,” Wittenberg said.

“Now that the light of day has been shined on it, I believe we can all rest assured that the beginning of the end of the bank crisis has arrived,” he added.

All I can say is I hope he is right. This is truly one of the most astounding cases which has come to light in recent history, to say the least.

If this case is successful it could very well mean a major blow to the entire corrupt global financial system.

About the Author

Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. He is available for podcast and radio interviews. If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at [email protected]

Enjoyed reading this article? Sign up to receive Wake Up World's bi-weekly email updates.

Email:

Submit

We respect your email privacy

6 Votes

Related Posts No related posts.

618 618 618 618 618 618 618 618 618 292929 2929 292929 29 111 11 111 1

Name (required)

E-mail (required, will not be published)

Website

Check here to Subscribe to notifications for new posts Submit Comment

NO COMMENTS YET.

COM MENTS(0)

Judicial Watch Obtains Documents Detailing the Cost to Taxpayers for Michelle Obama’s Family Trip to Africa

Charges for the Aircraft and Crew Alone Amount to $424,142

Judicial Watch, the organization that investigates and fights government corruption, announced today that it has obtained mission expense records and passenger manifests from the United States Air Force related to the June 21-27, 2011, trip taken by First Lady Michelle Obama, her family and her staff to South Africa and Botswana. Judicial Watch obtained the documents pursuant to an August 19, 2011, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Air Force (No. 11-1496)). Judicial Watch is investigating the purpose and itinerary of the trip as well as a breakdown of the costs to taxpayers.

On June 28, 2011, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request seeking the mission taskings, transportation records, and passenger manifests for Michelle Obama’s Africa trip. Documents were only provided after Judicial Watch filed suit:

•According to U.S. Department of Defense’s published hourly rates for the C-32A aircraft used for the trip, Judicial Watch calculated the total cost to American taxpayers was $424,142 for use of the aircraft (34.8 flight hours x $12,188 per hour). (The C-32 is a specially configured military version of the Boeing 757.) Other expenses – meals (off the plane), transportation, security, various services, etc. – have yet to be disclosed.
•The passenger manifests confirm the presence of Obama’s daughter’s, Malia and Sasha on the trip. The two girls are listed as “Senior Staff.” The manifests also list Mrs. Obama’s mother, Marian Robinson, and niece and nephew, Leslie and Avery Robinson, as well Mrs. Obama’s makeup and hairstylist (Carl Ray and Johnny Wright).
•The expense records also show $928.44 was spent for “bulk food” purchases on flight. Overall, during the trip, 192 meals were served for the 21 passengers on board.
The professed purpose of Michelle Obama’s trip to South Africa and Botswana was to encourage young people living in the two growing democracies to become involved in national affairs; and during her scheduled stops in Pretoria and Cape Town, South Africa and in Gaborone, the capital of Botswana, the First Lady used the opportunity to speak on education, health and wellness issues.The trip also included such tourist events as visits to historical landmarks and museums, plus a nonworking chance to send time with Nelson Mandela, a meeting that Mrs. Obama described as “surreal.” The trip ended with a private family safari at a South African game reserve before the group returned to Washington on June 27.“This trip was as much an opportunity for the Obama family to go on a safari as it was a trip to conduct government business,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This junket wasted tax dollars and the resources of our overextended military. No wonder we had to sue to pry loose this information.”

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-obtains-documents-detailing-the-cost-to-taxpayers-for-michelle-obama-s-family-trip-to-africa/ 


Why they need to git re-elected so they can see all the other continents! ON YOUR DIME!

Make it rain!

Obama attacks banks while raking in Wall Street dough

Published: 12:39 AM 10/10/2011

Despite his rhetorical attacks on Wall Street, a study by the Sunlight Foundation’s Influence Project shows that President Barack Obama has received more money from Wall Street than any other politician over the past 20 years, including former President George W. Bush.

In 2008, Wall Street’s largesse accounted for 20 percent of Obama’s total take, according to Reuters.

When asked by The Daily Caller to comment about President Obama’s credibility when it comes to criticizing Wall Street, the White House declined to reply.

Former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer says the distance between the president’s rhetoric and actions makes him look hypocritical.

“It’s almost as if President Obama won’t cross across a Wall Street picket line except to get inside with [his] hand out, so he can raise money,” Fleischer told TheDC, referring to the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators who the president has been encouraging over the past week. “That sort of support causes him to look hypocritical.”

Fleischer continued by saying that President Obama and Democrats, such as New York Sen. Charles Schumer, who has received approximately $8.7 million from Wall Street since 1989, should stop taking campaign donations from Wall Street banks if they are so offended by their actions.

“They can’t say we hate Wall Street, but we love their money,” Fleischer said. (RELATED: White House: Millionaire tax isn’t enough)

Being Wall Street’s campaign cash king is hardly the image President Obama has been trying to project in public, where he has been setting himself up as the champion of the progressive Occupy Wall Street movement and as the avenger of jilted Bank of America customers.

“Banks can make money,” Obama said last week, responding to questions during an interview with ABC News about Bank of America’s decision to levy a $5 monthly fee on debit card users. “They can succeed, the old-fashioned way, by earning it.”

In fact, the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan watchdog group that tracks lobbyist spending and influence in both parties, found that President Obama has received more money from Bank of America than any other candidate dating back to 1991.

An examination of the numbers shows that Obama took in $421,242 in campaign contributions in 2008 from Bank of America’s executives, PACs and employees, which exceeded its prior record contribution of $329,761 to President George W. Bush in 2004.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Wall Street firms also contributed more to Obama’s 2008 campaign than they gave to Republican nominee John McCain.

“The securities and investment industry is Obama’s second largest source of bundlers, after lawyers, at least 56 individuals have raised at least $8.9 million for his campaign,” Massie Ritsch wrote in a Sept. 18, 2008 entry on the Center for Responsive Politics’s OpenSecrets blog.

By the end of Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign, executives and others connected with Wall Street firms, such as Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup, UBS AG, JPMorgan Chase, and Morgan Stanley, poured nearly $15.8 million into his coffers.

There's a whole lot o' Quid Pro Quo'in goin' on over thar!


PS: Owedumba couldn't even fill up the Bank of America arena![frypan] [frypan] [frypan]


http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wh-retweets-working-peeps-slaves-2-wall-st_651837.html 

President Obama Parties With Jay-Z and Beyonce

Hip hop’s biggest power couple, Jay-Z and Beyonce, held a fundraiser for President Barack Obama tonight at Jay-Z’s 40/40 Club in Manhattan. In his speech at the event, Mr. Obama discussed his daughters’ love for the musicians and what he and Jay-Z have in common.

“Let me just begin by saying to Jay and Bey, thank you so much for your friendship. We are so grateful. Michelle and Malia and Sasha are mad at me because they are not here,” Mr. Obama said. “That doesn’t usually happen. Usually they’re like, we’re glad you’re going–we don’t need to go. But every time they get a chance to see these two they are thrilled, partly because they are just both so generous, particularly to my kids. And Malia and Sasha just love both of them.”

Mr. Obama went on to explain that Beyonce “couldn’t be a better role model for our daughters because she carries herself with such class and poise.” He then discussed the similarities between himself and Jay-Z.

“Jay-Z now knows what my life is like. We both have daughters, and our wives are more popular than we are. So we’ve got a little bond there. It’s hard, but it’s okay,” said the President.

Following those opening remarks referencing his famous hosts, Mr. Obama launched into what was basically his standard stump speech contrasting his vision for the country with that of his rival in the presidential race, Mitt Romney. However, at one other point in his remarks, Mr. Obama noted that, like him, Beyonce and Jay-Z came from humble beginnings.

“And the good thing about so many of us here–and I know, I speak for Jay and Bey–is we remember what it’s like not having anything, and we know people who were just as talented as us that didn’t get the same break, the same chance. We remember some of our parents or grandparents who came here as immigrants and got a little bit of help along the way to go to that school or be able to start that first business,” said Mr. Obama.

According to the press pool report filed by McClatchy’s Anita Kumar, Beyonce and Jay-Z “both said very little,” but Beyonce introduced the President prior to his speech saying she and her husband “believe in his vision.”

In addition to his event at the 40/40 Club tonight, Mr. Obama also appeared at a fundraiser at the Waldorf Astoria hotel and on The Late Show With Dave Letterman during his visit to New York City. The Republican National Committee responded by distributing a list to reporters of the “Top 10 Things Obama Should Be Doing Instead of Hobnobbing With Jay-Z, Beyonce and Letterman,” which included, “Get An Intelligence Briefing,” “Tell Americans How He’s Going To Get Nearly 47 Million Americans Off Food Stamps” and “Meet With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.”



It's rumored that Nero played a fiddle while he watched the flames consume Rome...a fire he had commissioned so he could "TRANSFORM" Rome in his image!

US Prepares for Riots, Buys 1.2 Billion Bullets, Yesterday, 4:21 PM

U.S. Homeland Security is preparing for an all-out “American Spring” rebellion and has bought 1.2 billion bullets for trained snipers.

U.S. Homeland Security is preparing for an all-out "American Spring" rebellion and has bought 1.2 billion bullets for counterterrorist snipers. An additional 200 million bullets are to be purchased, according to Infowars.com writer and author Paul Joseph Watson. The new purchase is for .223 rifle ammunition, plus another 176,000 rounds of .308 caliber 168 grain hollow point boat tail (HPBT) rounds in addition to 25,000 rounds of blank .308 caliber bullets. "It is the type of ammunition and not necessarily the quantity that is troubling," James Smith Prepper Podcast was quoted as saying. "All of the sniper grade ammunition is being used by trained, or in-the-process-of-being-trained snipers," wrote Smith. Adding up the number of lethal bullets tallies a potential 135,384 kills for the snipers, based on U.S. Army and Marine figures from the Vietnam War, when soldiers used 1.3 rounds of ammunition for each verified kill. Homeland Security"s purchases of the huge arsenal "is both worrying and ironic given that Americans are being harassed and treated with suspicion for buying a couple of boxes of ammo at their local gun store," Watson wrote. Government officials have refused to comment. Nearly half a billion rounds of ammunition purchased last March expand on entry into a body to cause maximum wounds. The large number of bullets raises questions if such large quantities are needed only for training. In addition, 750 million bullets can penetrate walls. The Homeland Security purchases are in addition to a controversial 174,000 bullets purchased by the Social Security Administration and reported by mainstream media, which has largely overlooked Homeland Security"s huge arsenal or has considered it a result of paranoia. However, the U.S. Army has been preparing for rebellion in the streets, and a Military Police training manual, entitled "Civil Disturbance Operations" describes how to suppress riots and kill civilians when confronting "dissidents." The manual states, "Warning shot will not be fired," Watson reported.

I better go see if Walmart has any 223s left.... 😟

U.S. President Barack Obama issued a new executive order last week to fight human trafficking, touting his administration's handling of the issue.

"When a little boy is kidnapped, turned into a child soldier, forced to kill or be killed -- that's slavery," Obama said in a speech at the Clinton Global Initiative. "It is barbaric, and it is evil, and it has no place in a civilized world. Now, as a nation, we've long rejected such cruelty."

But for the third year in a row, Obama has waived almost all U.S. sanctions that would punish certain countries that use child soldiers, upsetting many in the human rights community.

Late Friday afternoon, Obama issued a presidential memorandum waiving penalties under the Child Soldiers Protection Act of 2008 for Libya, South Sudan, and Yemen, penalties that Congress put in place to prevent U.S. arms sales to countries determined by the State Department to be the worst abusers of child soldiers in their militaries. The president also partially waived sanctions against the Democratic Republic of the Congo to allow some military training and arms sales to that country.

Human rights advocates saw the waivers as harmful to the goal of using U.S. influence to urge countries that receive military assistance to move away from using child soldiers and contradictory to the rhetoric Obama used in his speech.

"After such a strong statement against the exploitation of children, it seems bizarre that Obama would give a pass to countries using children in their armed forces and using U.S. tax money to do that," said Jesse Eaves, the senior policy advisor for child protection at World Vision.

The Obama administration doesn't want to upset its relationships with countries that it needs for security cooperation, but the blanket use of waivers is allowing the administration to avoid the law's intent, which was to use force the U.S. government to put a greater priority on human rights and child protection when doling out military aid, he said.

"The intent in this law was to use this waiver authority only in extreme circumstances, yet this has become an annual thing and this has become the default of this administration," Eaves said.

The Romney campaign has made Obama's record on human rights a feature of its foreign-policy critique, with top advisors accusing the president of deprioritizing the issue, often in sweeping terms.

"Barack Obama has broken with a tradition that goes back to Woodrow Wilson about human rights and values animating our foreign policy. This administration has not been an effective voice for human rights," said Romney campaign senior advisor for foreign policy Rich Williamson, who also served as George W. Bush's special envoy to Sudan, told The Cable in July.

Bush signed the child-soldiers law in 2008. It prohibits U.S. military education and training, foreign military financing, and other defense-related assistance to countries that actively recruit troops under the age of 18. Countries are designated as violators if the State Department's annual Trafficking in Persons report identifies them as recruiting child soldiers. The original bill was sponsored by Sen. ****** Durbin (D-IL).

Obama first waived the sanctions in 2010, the first year they were to go into effect. At that time, the White House failed to inform Congress or the NGO community of its decision in advance, setting off a fierce backlash. A justification memo obtained by The Cable at the time made several security-related arguments for the waivers. Sudan was going through a fragile transition, for example. Yemen was crucial to counterterrorism cooperation, the administration argued.

But NSC Senior Director for Multilateral Affairs Samantha Power told NGO leaders at the time that the waivers would not become a recurring event.

"Our judgment was: Brand them, name them, shame them, and then try to leverage assistance in a fashion to make this work," Power said, saying the administration wanted to give the violator countries one more year to show progress. "Our judgment is we'll work from inside the tent."

But the next year, in 2011, Obama waived almost all the sanctions once again, using largely the same justifications, except that the administration argued that the law didn't apply to South Sudan because it wasn't a country until July 2011. Rep. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) tried to pass new legislation to force Obama to notify Congress before issuing the waivers.

Fortenberry called the decision an "assault on human dignity," and said, "Good citizens of this country who do not want to be complicit in this grave human rights abuse must challenge this administration."

This year, the State Department held a briefing for NGO leaders and human rights activists to answer questions about the waivers and try to ally their concerns.

"They are addressing the concerns of the legislation in a more pragmatic and useful way than in the past, but they still have a ways to go and this was a clear missed opportunity," Rachel Stohl, a senior associate at the Stimson Center who attended the briefing, told The Cable. "You want the waivers to be used very sparingly but some of these countries get the waiver every year."

Stohl rejects the administration's argument that countries like Libya and South Sudan are so fragile that they can't be leaned on to do better on human rights.

"I would argue that this is exactly the right time to make clear to Libya what the parameters are," she said.

Jo Becker, advocacy director for the children's rights division at Human Rights Watch, told The Cable that where the United States has used some pressure, such as in the DRC, where there was a partial cutoff of military aid last year, there was a positive effect.

"After years of foot-dragging, Congo is close to signing a U.N. action plan to end its use of child soldiers," she said. "But in other countries with child soldiers, including South Sudan, Libya, and Yemen, the U.S. continues to squander its leverage by giving military aid with no conditions."

So now people complain because Obama is putting children to work......job creation, bitches.

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/10/01/whats-behind-obamas-curious-timing-of-gitmo-jihadist-omar-khadrs-release/ 


BACK TO WORK!!!🐴