Tax-exempt charity of Obama’s half-brother is a fraud

By now, unless you’re a know-nothing LIV (Low Information Voter), you’ve heard and seen plenty about the IRS singling out conservatives and Christians for special scrutiny. (See “Groups & individuals targeted by Obama’s IRS witchhunt,” May 15, 2013.)

Less known is another travesty in President Lucifer’s IRS-gate: The IRS had fast-tracked a charity run by Obama’s half-brother, Abon’go “Roy” Malik Obama, for tax-exempt approval.

Abon’go “Roy” Malik Obama holding a photo of him with a young Barack Hussein “Lucifer” Obama.

The charity is called the Barack H. Obama Foundation, named after the Obama brothers’ Kenyan dad, Barack H. Obama, Sr. Its mission statement is “to provide people everywhere with resources to uplift their welfare and living standards in memory of Barack H. Obama: in the region of his birth, Kenya, and beyond.”

First reported by The Daily Caller, the Barack H. Obama Foundation was speedily approved for IRS exemption by Lois Lerner, the IRS senior official at the center of the targeting of conservative organizations that have waited over two years to receive tax exempt status. More astonishing still is the fact that the BHO Foundation was given retroactive tax-exempt status despite never having bothered to apply for it. The IRS also overlooked the foundation’s history of soliciting donations before receiving tax-exempt status.

Now, there is another layer of stench added to Malik Obama’s tax-exempt foundation:

It’s a fraud!

Charles C. Johnson reports for The Daily Caller, May 20, 2013, that on its  website barackhobamafoundation.org, the Barack H. Obama Foundation lists its address as 107 S. West St. #401, Alexandria, Va.

Here’s a pic of 107 S. West St., #401, Alexandria, VA:

107 S. West St., #401, is a UPS store!

“They probably just rent a mailbox here or receive mail here,” said a UPS employee when asked if the store was the address for the Barack H. Obama Foundation. She did not know if Malik Obama, who his website says divides his time between Kenya and Virginia, had been in to the store.

A visit to the UPS store revealed that there is a mailbox numbered 401.

To add to the mystery and confusion fraud, the Barack H. Obama Foundation’s IRS filings list another Virginia address: 4201 Wilson Blvd. Ste 110-152, Arlington, Va. 22030.

But that address is a marketing center for a drug-alcohol rehab center called A Better Today Recovery Services. A receptionist who answered the phone at A Better Today said neither she nor anybody in the office had heard of the Barack H. Obama Foundation. She said A Better Today had been located at the Arlington address for “a couple years.” The IRS filings that list the Arlington address as the foundation’s headquarters were dated May 2011.

“I don’t know if it’s listed wrong or what’s going on, but we have never heard of that,” the receptionist said, adding that A Better Today had never received calls or correspondence related to the BHO Foundation.

Despite raising more than $250,000, the alleged charity BHO Foundation doesn’t seem to have done much. Its website claims the organization has built a madrassa and was building an imam’s house as well as some “proposed latrines,” but there is no other evidence that the nonprofit was working to “mitigate social-shortcomings in areas of education and literacy, health and well-being, poverty, and lack of community infrastructure in such basic needs such as water, electricity, shelter and sustenance,” as the site says.

Alton Ray Baysden

Alton Ray Baysden, a former Department of State employee and registered Republican who helped to start the Barack H. Obama Foundation, declined to comment. Repeated phone calls by The Daily Caller to the Barack H. Foundation went to the organization’s voicemail and were not returned.

~Eowyn

Fla. Gov. Scott vetoes sheriff’s $1 million ‘snitch on your neighbor’ program

 DOESN’T this program kinda remind you of how the gestapo might have been started?

————————————————————————————–

Gov.Scott

http://www.bizpacreview.com       May 20, 2013 by Joe Saunders

Gov. Rick Scott on Monday vetoed almost $368 million in state spending before signing the budget for next year, including $1 million for a violence prevention and mental health initiative sought by the Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw.

Bradshaw’s program would have established a hotline for residents to call when they suspected an individual might be planning a violent act.

If a call were deemed cause for concern, that person might be visited by deputies trained to deal with mental health issues.

In interviews, he cited such incidents as the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut and a movie theater in Auroroa, Colo., as instances where a watchful eye and trained help might have prevented tragedy.

But the proposal drew fire from conservatives when a widespread quote from a Palm Beach Post  story fueled fears of government taking action against people because of how they think, not how they’ve acted.

“We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor and he’s gonna shoot him,” Bradshaw said in the article.

“What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?’”

Scott also turned down a 3 percent tuition increase for state college and university students.

Rest HERE!!!!

US military gives itself authority to police America without permission

This is deeply disturbing.

About three months ago, quietly and without anyone noticing, the Obama regime’s Department of Defense (DoD) gave itself the authority to use U.S. military troops to police America without permission from the President of the United States (POTUS) or state or local government.

US Army tanks “training” in the streets of St. Louis, June 2012.

The U.S. military is prohibited from intervening in domestic affairs, a prohibition codified in two laws:

• The Insurrection Act of 1807 is the set of laws that govern the ability of POTUS to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. The laws are chiefly contained in 10 U.S.C. § 331 – 10 U.S.C. § 335. The general aim is to limit Presidential power as much as possible, relying on state and local governments for initial response in the event of insurrection.

• The Posse Comitatus Act (PCA), a U.S. federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed after the end of Reconstruction on June 18, 1878, and updated in 1981 to refer specifically to the U.S. Armed Forces, makes unauthorized deployment of federal troops a punishable offense, thereby giving teeth to the Insurrection Act. The PCA does not apply to the U.S. Coast Guard (because the Coast Guard operates under the authority of the Dept. of Homeland Security instead of the Pentagon), nor does the PCA apply to the National Guard (because the National Guard is under state authority and can act in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state’s governor).

The only exception to the deployment of U.S. military troops within the United States is provided under Section 4 of Article IV of the U.S. Constitution, which says: “and [the United States] shall protect each of them [the States] against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.” In other words, Article IV requires the U.S. government to protect each state from invasion and, upon the application of the state legislature (or executive, if the legislature cannot be convened), from domestic violence.

Together, these laws limit executive authority over domestic military action.

About three months ago, however, as reported by Jed Morey for the Long Island Press, the Department of Defense (DoD) unilaterally made a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” and in so doing, granted itself the authority to police America’s streets without obtaining prior presidential, state, or local consent, thereby upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.

Pursuant to those changes, the DoD issued a 42-page Department of Defense Instruction (DODI), No. 3025.21, February 27, 2013. (Click here or here for the PDF version of DODI.)

DODI no. 3025.21′s subject is “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies.” Its purpose, “In accordance with the authority in DoD Directive (DoDD) 5111.1 and Deputy Secretary of Defense Memorandum (References (a) and (b)), is to establish “DoD policy, assigns responsibilities, and provides procedures for DoD support to Federal, State, tribal, and local civilian law enforcement agencies, including responses to civil disturbances within the United States, including the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any territory or possession of the United States or any other political subdivision thereof in accordance with DoDD 3025.18 (Reference (c)).

The most disturbing part of the DODI no. 3025.21 begins on page 15: “Enclosure 3: Participation of DoD Personnel in Civilian Law Enforcement Activities.”

On page 16, under Section 1b’s “Permissible Direct Assistance” is a subsection (3), which states:

When permitted under emergency authority in accordance with Reference (c), Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances because:

(a) Such activities are necessary to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order; or,

(b) When duly constituted Federal, State, or local authorities are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for Federal property or Federal governmental functions. Federal action, including the use of Federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect Federal property or functions.

Jed Morey of the Long Island Press cites Bruce Afran, a civil liberties attorney and constitutional law professor at Rutgers University, who calls the DODI rule, “a wanton power grab by the military,” which is “quite shocking actually because it violates the long-standing presumption that the military is under civilian control.”

Afran points out that Section 1b(3) of the DODI not only fails to define what circumstances would be so severe that the president’s authorization is “impossible,” it also grants full presidential authority to “Federal military commanders” who have the same power to authorize military force as the president when the latter’s authorization is “impossible” — whatever that means.

As Afran puts it, “These phrases don’t have any legal meaning. It’s no different than the emergency powers clause in the Weimar constitution [of the German Reich]. It’s a grant of emergency power to the military to rule over parts of the country at their own discretion.”

Afran also expresses apprehension over the government’s authority “to engage temporarily in activities necessary to quell large-scale disturbances.” “Governments never like to give up power when they get it,” says Afran. “They still think after twelve years they can get intelligence out of people in Guantanamo. Temporary is in the eye of the beholder. That’s why in statutes we have definitions. All of these statutes have one thing in common and that is that they have no definitions. How long is temporary? There’s none here. The definitions are absurdly broad.”

Afran reminds us that, unlike the military, “the police operate under civilian control. They are used to thinking in a civilian way so the comparison that they may have some assault weapons doesn’t change this in any way. And they can be removed from power. You can’t remove the military from power.” Afran is considering amending his NDAA complaint currently in front of the court to include this regulatory change.

Jed Morey concludes: “for the first time in our history the military has granted itself authority to quell a civil disturbance. Changing this rule now requires congressional or judicial intervention. [...] As we witnessed during the Boston bombing manhunt, it’s already difficult to discern between military and police. In the future it might be impossible, because there may be no difference.”

H/t Washington’s Blog

See also:

• “US Army targets Tea Party movement as extremists in 2016 civil war scenario,” Aug. 16, 2012.
• “Armored military vehicles to patrol in Wisconsin,” Aug. 14, 2012.
• “What about those U.S. Army tanks in the streets of St. Louis?,” June 25, 2012.
• “Army tanks on streets of St. Louis,” June 24, 2012.
• “Armed U.S. troops in residential streets of Crookston, MN,” May 1, 2012.
• “U.S. Citizens Still Subject to Detention w/out Trial in Final Version of Defense Bill,” Dec. 14, 2011.

~Eowyn

Another mob of Black teens “working twice as hard” terrorizing Chicago

Alexandria Fisher reports for NBC5 Chicago that on Saturday night, May 18, 2013, Chicago once again was subjected to an unruly “flash mob”.

A group of 40 to 60 teens was seen disrupting and running through traffic along North Michigan Avenue in Chicago’s Gold Coast neighborhood. Police arrested 12 people, including 11 juveniles, for obstructing traffic and being reckless.

The disturbance came on the same day that Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed into law new legislation that would implement harsher penalties for violent flash mobs who organize via social media.

Recent attacks along Chicago’s “Magnificent Mile” prompted concerns from many area residents. Last month, more than two dozen teens were arrested after groups began randomly attacking each other and pedestrians. “We see it virtually every year when the weather gets warm,” Supt. Garry McCarthy said after last month’s attacks.

The “flash mob” on April 1, 2013, involved as many as 300 to 400 swarming teens.

Reporters refuse to say it, but hundreds of “teens” swarming on city streets, “attaching each other and pedestrians” is a form of TERRORISM.

Reporters today simply refuse to actually report the facts. Facts like who these flash mobs are, and who are the “unruly teens” whom police arrested.

So let’s play a “Guess Who” game!

Here are some pictures from last Saturday night’s mob scene in Chicago’s “Magnificent Mile”:

Chicago police officers monitor a group of teens near the intersection of Chicago and Michigan Ave., May 18, 2013. (Nuccio DiNuzzo / Chicago Tribune)

Below are 4 screenshots I took from NBC5 Chicago’s news video (which you can watch for yourself by going here):

And here are screenshots I took from the NBCChicago news video of the “flash mob” of 300-400 teens on April 1, 2013 (you can watch the video for yourself, here):

So,how did you do in our “Guess Who” game?

On May 19, 2013, a day after the “flash mob” of “unruly teens” ran amuck in Chicago’s “Magnificent Mile,” President Lucifer the POS played the race card when he gave the Commencement address at the black college Morehouse College.

The man who became President of the United States despite being a B-average student, actually said: “As an African American you have to work twice as hard as anyone else if you want to get by.”

Hey, you POS in the White House. By “working twice as hard as anyone else,” are you referring to those “African American” teens in those “flash mobs” in your home Chi-town?

~Eowyn

Just The Facts Ma’am, Just The Facts.

Subject: Why Carry a Gun?

Why Carry a Gun? 

My old grandpa said to me ‘Son, there comes a time in every man’s life when he stops bustin’ knuckles and starts bustin’ caps, and
usually it’s when he becomes too old to take a whoopin.’

I don’t carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.

I don’t carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry.
I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don’t carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Police protection is an oxymoron.
Free citizens must protect themselves.
Police do not protect you from crime, they usually just investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to clean up the mess.
Personally, I carry a gun because I’m too young to die and too old to take a whoopin’…..author unknown (but obviously brilliant)

See Update on Switzerland!!

**********************************************

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
—- ————- ————-

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
——————————

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
—————————–

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
——————————

You won’t see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it’s too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are ‘citizens’. Without them, we are ‘subjects’.

During WW II the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti gun -control message to all of your friends. 

The purpose of fighting is to win. 
There is no possible victory in defense. 
The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. 
The final weapon is the brain.
All else is supplemental. 

SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN! 
SWITZERLAND’S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT TO WHOM THEY ISSUE A RIFLE. 

This was brought to my attention

One other point is particularly important here. The description of gun distribution in Switzerland omits important information.

The Swiss government doesn’t hand out a gun to every household. It requires nearly every able-bodied young male adult to serve in the citizen militia, where they are issued a military rifle. The guns are supposed to be for military use only, not for personal defense.

Those men are supposed to show up for 18 weeks of training, followed by seven re-training sessions (each lasting three weeks) over the next 10 years.

If you want to keep your weapon after your years of service, it is refitted to scale back its firepower and you need to provide a reason for keeping it.

IT’S A NO BRAINER! 
DON’T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET. 

I’m a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment! 
If you are too, please forward.
    

~ Steve ~                   H/T  FOTM’s OWN  Ken L.

Wild Bill: How to destroy the U.S. military

Q: How do you destroy the most powerful military in the world?

A: From within, via psychological warfare:

1. Force our soldiers to share their tents and showers with open homosexuals.
2. Send a message that our soldiers are expendable and if they get into trouble, their government will leave them to die.
3. Keep the military engaged in endless war, all over the world.

~Eowyn

Do you know a Ben Ghazi?

Low Information Voters Dumb Asses of America unite!

Public Policy Polling surveyed 576 U.S. voters nationwide through automated telephone interviews, May 10-12.

The poll found that Republicans aren’t getting much traction with their focus on Benghazi over the last week. Voters trust Hillary Clinton over Congressional Republicans on the issue of Benghazi by a 49/39 margin and Clinton’s +8 net favorability rating at 52/44 is identical to what it was on PPP’s last national poll in late March. Meanwhile Congressional Republicans remain very unpopular with a 36/57 favorability rating.

Voters think Congress should be more focused on other major issues right now rather than Benghazi. By a 56/38 margin they say passing a comprehensive immigration reform bill is more important than continuing to focus on Benghazi, and by a 52/43 spread they think passing a bill requiring background checks for all gun sales should be a higher.

The PPP poll’s margin of error is +/-4.1%. PPP claims the poll was not paid for or authorized by any campaign or political organization.

Moral of this story:

Never, ever, underestimate the sheer utter stupidity of Americans.

~Eowyn

House committee investigates IRS witch-hunt: Live streaming

Russell George (l); Steve Miller (r)

This morning, the GOP-majority House Ways and Means Committee holds the first Congressional hearing on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeting conservatives and Christians for higher levels of scrutiny.

Outgoing Acting IRS Commissioner Steve Miller, Obama’s first scapegoat in his IRS-gate, told a House committee that “foolish mistakes” were  made by the tax agency, but that partisanship wasn’t the reason. [Hey, Miller, if "partisanship wasn't the reason," then why did you "resign" from the IRS? ~Eowyn]

Treasury Department’s Inspector General for Tax Administration Russell George testified at the same hearing and said he did not find evidence that IRS’ decisions were motivated by politics. [HaHaHaHaHa! That Russell George is a real stand-up comedian! ~Eowyn]

To watch the hearing live, click here.

Meanwhile, NBC’s Lisa Myers reported this morning that the IRS  deliberately chose not to reveal that it had wrongly targeted conservative groups until after the 2012 presidential election.

But remember we’ve been told: “partisanship wasn’t the reason” and there’s no “evidence that IRS’ decisions were motivated by politics”!

~Eowyn

Let’s play another Caption Contest game!

This is the 47th world-famous FOTM Caption Contest!

Here’s the pic (h/t FOTM’s DCG):

Photo taken at the George W. Bush Presidential Library dedication, Dallas, Texas, April 25, 2013. 

You know the drill:

• The winner of the Caption Contest will get a gorgeous Award Certificate of Excellence and a year’s free subscription to FOTM!
• FOTM writers will vote for the winner.
• Any captions proffered by FOTM writers, no matter how brilliant (ha ha), will not be considered.

This contest will be closed in a week, at the end of next Friday, May 24, 2013.

To get the contest going, here’s my caption:

Sigmund Freud: “See that woman skulking in the back? Classic case of penis envy!”

For the winner of our last Caption Contest, go here.

~Eowyn

Let’s See who Else The I.R.S. Picked On.

let’s just pile on shall we.  :D    ~Steve~

—————————————————————————-

From the http://washingtonexaminer.com

May 15, 2013 | 2:40 pm | Modified: May 16, 2013 at 9:35 am

Report: IRS denied tax-exempt status to pro-lifers on behalf of Planned Parenthood

IRS officials refused to grant tax exempt status to two pro-life organizations because of their position on the abortion issue, according to a non-profit law firm, which said that one group was pressured not to protest a pro-choice organization that endorsed President Obama during the last election.

“In one case, the IRS withheld approval of an application for tax exempt status for Coalition for Life of Iowa. In a phone call to Coalition for Life of Iowa leaders on June 6, 2009, the IRS agent ‘Ms. Richards’ told the group to send a letter to the IRS with the entire board’s signatures stating that, under perjury of the law, they do not picket/protest or organize groups to picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood,” the Thomas More Society announced today. “Once the IRS received this letter, their application would be approved.”

Planned Parenthood endorsed Obama in 2008 and 2012.

The IRS also pressured another pro-life group about its religious activities. “The IRS withheld approval of an application for charitable tax-exempt recognition of Christian Voices for Life, questioning the group’s involvement with ’40 Days for Life’ and ‘Life Chain’ events,” according to the law firm. “The Fort Bend County, Texas, organization was subjected to repeated and lengthy unconstitutional requests for information about the viewpoint and content of its educational communications, volunteer prayer vigils, and other protected activities.”

The IRS admitted last week to that some members of the agency targeted Tea Party groups for discriminatory reviews of their applications for tax-exempt status. The Justice Department has initiated a criminal investigation into the matter.

just thinking out loud, but that DOESN’T seem fair.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/report-irs-denied-tax-exempt-status-to-pro-lifers-on-behalf-of-planned-parenthood/article/2529750