Question: Do you find it interesting that President Obama is now accusing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce of illegally funneling foreign money into U.S. campaigns, especially when there was overwhelming evidence that foreign nationals from the Muslim world influenced our 2008 presidential election thru illegal contributions to Obama’s campaign, which is still an active FEC investigation?
The following articles and/or blog posts and video reveal the President and his administration’s disturbing and deplorable actions-You Decide:
I. Recipient of Foreign Donations Accuses Others of Taking Foreign Donations!–Posted on National Review Online- By Jim Geraghty–October 12, 2010:
These are pertinent excerpts from this article and/or blog post:
“Hey, remember this?
Over at the American Thinker, Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs looks through FEC reports and spotlights some donations to Obama that raise serious questions.
She noticed $33,000 in donations from two brothers living in the Gaza Strip. (The Obama campaign says they returned the money.)
She finds a donor named “Hbkjb, jkbkj” living in the city of “Jkbjnj.”
Or a donor named “Doodad”, occupation “DFGFDG”, employer “FDGFDGF, who has donated $10,780.00.
Remember this story about the North Kansas City couple?
Steve and Rachel Larman say a strange credit card charge appeared on their statement this month — a $2300 donation to Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.
Now take a look at this story:
Not long ago, the Obama campaign called [Mary Biskup of Manchester, Missouri] to ask why she donated $174,800, which was just $172,500 above the legal limit.
“That’s an error,” she said.
Biskup told the Post that someone must have use her name but other people’s credit cards to donate the money since no charges ever showed up on her bill.
John Galt of Ayn Rand Lane (zip code: a nonexistent 99999) was able to donate [to Obama’s campaign through his web site] with no problem.
Despite the fact that the card holder’s name and address do not match the name he provided.
John McCain’s website? Rejected the same non-matching-information donation.
Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor’s identity, campaign officials confirmed.
Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited.
Very few Americans seemed to care about these allegations of foreign donations or donations using stolen credit card numbers back in 2008. It interfered with the narrative, I guess, even though it would seem to be a fairly huge story; we are indeed talking about huge amounts. By one count, $63 million came to Obama from foreign sources. Even if that figure is exaggerated tenfold, this is still a big deal.
It’s not only hypocritical for President Obama, of all figures, to suddenly thunder about the menace of sinister foreign money helping the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; in 2008, we had actual evidence of foreign money ending up in Obama campaign coffers. (We had it in 1996 with Bill Clinton’s reelection campaign, too.) It was deemed a back-pages story and perhaps even a bit xenophobic.
This is like Al Capone accusing Eliot Ness of being a bootlegger.”
II. Hume Asks About Undisclosed ‘08 Obama Donors in Wake of W.H.’s Chamber Witch Hunt–Posted on News Busters-By Jeff Poor-On October 12, 2010:
These are pertinent excerpts from this article and/or blog post:
“The White House’s current effort to disparage the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is an act of desperation in light of the low poll numbers of the Democratic Party going into the November midterm, as some have pointed out. But perhaps President Barack Obama should address some questions about his own fundraising before attacking other organizations.
On the Oct. 11 broadcast of Fox News Channel’s “Special Report with Bret Baier,” former host and network contributor Brit Hume took on the issue of administration officials using the bully pulpit to push these charges. According to Hume, the charges are baseless and even the White House’s allies in the mainstream media are questioning this strategy.
“The attacks by President Obama and the Democratic Party on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others say as much as any poll about the plight of the Democrats this fall,” Hume said. “The claim of foreign money flowing into Republican coffers is so transparently without proof that even organs of the mainstream media are saying so. No evidence has emerged, said The New York Times. The TV critic of the Baltimore Sun called the Democratic ad about foreign money, quote, ‘a new low in the midterm battle.’ The fact that President Obama himself has joined in such claims suggest that he and his party have given up all hope of appealing to swing voters who dislike this kind of attack. They now seem focused solely on trying to turn out Democratic base voters to keep the expected mid-term rout from turning into a massacre.”
He noted some problem areas for the president, particularly dealing with the economy, and said these charges are a product of the administration’s inability to fix the situation. However, he asked why a president that claimed he was going to change the status quo in Washington is hanging his hat on allegations generated by a left-wing George Soros-funded operation, allegations that remind the public that Obama has never answered questions about funding for his 2008 campaign.
“Amid high unemployment and widespread sentiment across the right and center that Obama and his party have gone too far left, even well-established Democratic politicians in such Democratic strongholds as California and New England are vulnerable,” Hume continued. “Thus, a president and the party who campaigned on hope and change ceases on an unsupported claim that originated on a left-wing website to raise dark questions about secret and foreign influence in the election. And never mind that a still undetermined amount of cash flowed in to the Obama’s campaign two years ago from donors who used prepaid credit cards and other devices that hid their actual identities.”
Host Bret Baier asked if there were any developments on the questions surrounding Obama’s 2008 campaign, which seem to have been forgotten about two years later just as these allegations have arose.
“We don’t. And back at the time, there was one woman who was down on the campaign finance list as having given almost $175,000 to the Obama campaign,” Hume replied. “She was well out in Missouri. She got a telephone call from The Washington Post to ask her about it. She said she hadn’t given any money. That scores of other contributors, we still don’t know who they are, had given that money in her name.”
Hume’s prediction: This is business as usual and this trumped up meme will fade into obscurity just as those charges against Obama did following the 2008 presidential election.
“It’s just one of the many ways that you can give money without being known, without being identified to these campaigns,” he said. “Both parties do it. There’s nothing illegal about it. There was no big scandal back then, and I doubt it will amount to much of a big scandal now.”
These are pertinent excerpts from this article and/or blog post:
“It is astonishing, really.
The president of the United States has accused the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, despite its denial and without supporting evidence, of illegally funneling foreign money into U.S. campaigns. “Just this week,” Barack Obama said recently about the chamber, “we learned that one of the largest groups paying for these [political] ads regularly takes in money from foreign corporations. So groups that receive foreign money are spending huge sums to influence American elections.”
On CBS’s Face the Nation, host Bob Schieffer asked David Axelrod, senior adviser to the president, if there is any evidence to support their accusation. Axelrod responded this way: “Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob?”
Likewise, Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, wouldn’t back away from the incendiary charges yesterday. “The president will continue to make the argument that we don’t know where this money comes from and entities like the Chamber have said they get money from overseas,” Gibbs told reporters at the White House.
Set aside the hypocrisy of this whole episode. (My former White House colleague Ed Gillespie points out that no Democrats, least of all Obama, expressed concern about such outside spending in 2008, when more than $400 million was spent to help elect Barack Obama, much of it from undisclosed donors.) Set aside the fact that Mr. Axelrod concedes that the chamber is abiding by long-standing rules, that it doesn’t have to disclose its donors list, and that no other organizations are disclosing theirs. Set aside the fact that the chamber has 115 foreign-member affiliates who pay a total of less than $100,000 in membership dues to a group whose total budget is more than $200 million. And set aside the fact that various news organizations have dismissed the charges, including the New York Times, which reports, “a closer examination shows that there is little evidence that what the chamber does in collecting overseas dues is improper or even unusual, according to both liberal and conservative election-law lawyers and campaign finance documents.”
What we are witnessing is the abuse of power. We are now in a situation in which the president and his most senior advisers feel completely at liberty to throw out unsubstantiated charges and put the burden on people (and institutions) to prove their innocence. Liberals once referred to such tactics as McCarthyism. But Joseph McCarthy, for all his abuses, was “only” a United States senator, one member out of 100. The president and his advisers, on the other hand, have at their disposal far more power and the ability to inflict far more injury.
What Obama and his aides are demanding is that the Chamber of Commerce prove a negative — and in doing so, they are trying to intimidate the chamber into disclosing what is, by law, privileged information. “If the Chamber doesn’t have anything to hide about these contributions,” Mr. Axelrod says, “and I take them at their word that they don’t, then why not disclose? Why not let people see where their money is coming from?”
Let’s see if we can help Mr. Axelrod out by providing him with an explanation.
For one thing, he is employing the guilty-until-proven-innocent argument. For another, the White House’s standard is being selectively applied. And it encourages slanderous charges because it forces innocent people to disprove them. All this is troubling in any case; but it is triply pernicious when it is practiced by those with unmatched power, because they have an unparalleled capacity to intimidate American citizens.
In further answering Axelrod’s argument, consider this thought experiment. It’s the year 2021, and a partisan critic of a future president repeatedly asserts that the president is addicted to child pornography. It turns out that the critic has no proof of the charge — but when told he is asking the president to prove a negative, he responds: “I take the president at his word. But just to be sure, we’d like to examine his phone records and text messages, his computer accounts, and his credit card receipts. What we want, in other words, is full access to all the relevant information we need. After all, if he’s innocent, why not disclose this information? Why not let people see what you’re doing with your life and free time?”
It must be obvious to Messrs. Axelrod and Obama that what they are doing is irresponsible, dangerous, and deeply illiberal. It’s important to note, however, that this libel is taking place within a particular context. The attack on the Chamber of Commerce is only the most recent link in a long chain. The Obama White House has targeted Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie, and John Boehner; George W. Bush and Dick Cheney; conservative talk radio; Fox News; the state of Arizona; the Supreme Court (for its decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission); members of the Tea Party; critics of ObamaCare who attended town hall meetings; pharmaceutical, insurance, and oil companies; corporate executives, Wall Street, and the “rich.”
All this ugliness comes to us courtesy of a man who said during the 2008 campaign that “the times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same partisan playbook”; who told us that we should “resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long”; and who assured us, on the night of his election, “I will listen to you, especially when we disagree.”
Back in October 2009, I wrote about this White House’s burning anger and resentment toward its critics and what it foreshadowed. That inferno is burning hotter than ever – and if it goes unchecked, it will eventually lead to a crisis.
In an August 16, 1971, memorandum from White House Counsel John Dean to Lawrence Higby, titled “Dealing with our Political Enemies,” Dean wrote:
This memorandum addresses the matter of how we can maximize the fact of our incumbency in dealing with persons known to be active in their opposition to our Administration; stated a bit more bluntly – how we can use the available federal machinery to screw our political enemies.
At comparable stages in their first terms, the Obama administration seems to be at least as eager as the Nixon administration to use the available federal machinery to “screw our political enemies.” We know how things turned out for the Nixon administration. President Obama cannot say he hasn’t been forewarned.”
IV. The Democratic ‘D’ Now Stands for Demagoguery–A Commentary posted on Rasmussen Reports-By Michael Barone-On October 15, 2010:
V. Public Enemy No. 1: GOP Donors ‘The Left wages war on conservatives’ right to free speech.’–Posted on National Review Online-By Michelle Malkin-On October 15, 2010:
VI. More Convenient Front-Page Fretting in the New York Times About ‘Anonymous’ GOP Donors–Posted on The Media Research Center-By Clay Waters-On October 13, 2010:
VII. Video: Rush, “We Don’t Even Know” If Obama Is Foreign–Posted on ExposeObama.com-On October 12, 2010:
VIII. When it comes to foreign money flowing into campaigns, Obama has a short memory–Posted on American Thinker-By Rick Moran-On October 10, 2010:
X. Secret Obama Election Memo Uncovered!–Posted on Floyd Reports-By Ben Johnson-On October 11, 2010:
XI. Obama the Alien: ‘To be so completely disconnected from political reality and the investor class, the president must be from another planet.’–Posted on National Review Online-By Larry Kudlow-On October 12, 2010:
Note: These are other articles and/or blog posts that relate to and/or support the above articles and/or blog posts-You Decide:
II. WH Working on Executive Order That Critics Say Will Stifle Political Speech–Posted on CNSNews.com-By Fred Lucas-On April 25, 2011:
III. US Democrats Widen Assault on Anonymous Campaign Cash–Posted on NewsMax.com-On April 21, 2011:
IV. Disclosing a Dem Double Standard: ‘Releasing details on political donors wasn’t always so important to Team Obama.’–Posted on National Review Online-By ALLISON HAYWARD-On October 27, 2010:
V. Video: Rush, Chinese Are Paying Obama’s Salary-Posted on ImpeachObamaCampaign.com-By Ben-On October 14, 2010:
VI. Rove-backed group raised $13M since attacks from Obama–Posted on The Hill-By Michael O’Brien-On October 13, 2010:
VII. Defiant Chamber Vows to Spend More on Election–Posted on NewsMax.com-On October 12, 2010:
VIII. CBS’s Rodriguez: ‘Undignified’ Obama ‘Offering No Evidence’ of GOP Taking Foreign Money-Posted on The Media Research Center-By Kyle Drennen-On October 11, 2010:
IX. Democrats’ attack ad sets new low for midterm mud–Posted on The Baltimore Sun-By David Zurawik -On October 11, 2010:
X. If You Cant Beat Them, Silence Them-Posted on The Heritage Foundation-On October 11, 2010:
XI. Shutting Up Business: ‘Democrats unleash the IRS and Justice on donors to their political opponents.’–Posted on The Wall Street Journal-On October 10, 2010:
XII. Rove, Gillespie Slam Obama for Spreading ‘Baseless Lie’ Over Foreign Contributions-Posted on FoxNews.com-On October 10, 2010:
XIII. Obama’s Race Taunts Unsuited to the Presidency, Says Project 21 Chairman-Posted on The National Center for Public Policy Research-On October 12, 2010:
XV. Obama’s McCarthyite Moment: Is it possible to be post-American and xenophobic at the same time?–Posted on National Review Online-By Rich Lowry-On October 12, 2010:
XVI. Two More Calls for Impeachment–Posted on Floyd Reports-By Guest Writer-On October 13, 2010:
XVII. NY missed deadline for military ballots–Posted on WRGB CBS6 Albany-By The Associated Press-On October 11, 2010:
XVIII. Clinton Heckled In Blue New York, Says Half of Republicans Need Psychiatric Help–Posted on The Blaze-By Pam Key-On October 12, 2010:
XIX. The President’s Nun: Obamacare Scranton Scandal Explodes!–Posted on The American Spectator-By Jeffrey Lord-On October 11, 2010:
XX. Video: Reagan vs. Today’s Democrats-Posted on ExposeObama.com-On October 13, 2010:
XXI. Soros Watch: $45 million to sabotage America’s judiciary–Posted on Michelle Malkin-By Michelle Malkin-On September 9, 2010:
XXII. STEALING THE NEXT ELECTION: ‘From amnesty to universal registration, Obama’s strategy for maintaining power’–Posted on WND.com-On March 1, 2010:
XXIII. Obama Makes First Move to Undermine 2010 Elections:
Note: These are other articles and/or blog posts that reveal other despicable actions taken against American retail outlets by a George Soros funded liberal political group that is angry with them because of their political contributions-You Decide:
I. Retailer Target now the target of a boycott by MoveOn.org, gays-Posted on CNN.com-By By CNN Political Producer Shannon Travis-On August 6, 2010:
III. There is a ‘threat to democracy,’ but not what Obama claims–Posted on Review Journal-By Thomas Mitchell-On October 13, 2010:
IV. MoveOn.org Bullies Crack Down on Critics–Posted on Creators.com-By Michelle Malkin-On October 7, 2007:
Note: The above articles and/or blog posts relate to and/or support my following blog posts-You Decide:
Democrats raised more than $1 million from foreign-affiliated PACs!
Who or what caused the economic crisis that propelled President Obama into office?
Active complaint to the FEC over President Obama’s campaign finances!
FEC allows SEIU’s illegal political fund-raising scheme!
ACORN Charged With Voter Registration Fraud!
New York Times Finally Admits It Spiked Obama/ACORN Corruption Story!
Was Obama rattled by developing donor scandal story?
Did Saudis Buy Obama 2008 Election?
Godfather of The Islamic Revolution!
Sen. Obama’s Radical Islamic Past and Ties To Terrorist Groups!
What we haven’t been told about the President’s background!
The Greatest Fraud Perpetrated in American History!
President and DOJ have contributed to the racial mess in our country!
Obama the Polarizer!
Jewish Donors Outraged by ‘Sociopath’ Obama!
The Midterm Elections and the Communist Manifesto!
How ABC, CBS and NBC Have Dismissed and Disparaged the Tea Party Movement!
Obamanites Get Violent in Support of the Agenda!
Positive Political Change In The Air For 2010!
Washington Times Calls for Obama’s Impeachment!
Extensive Research Into Senator Obama’s Background Completed on November 3, 2008!
Where Is America Today?
A Nation Adrift Theme and Disclaimer:
“Food For Thought”
“God Bless & Keep Our USA Safe”