by Elizabeth Ruiz
“I was often the ‘designated yeller.’”
That’s how Hillary Clinton described her relationship with the Israeli prime minister. Yelling and cursing was her particular specialty.
One marathon Hillary yelling session allegedly lasted 45 minutes. Afterward the Israeli ambassador said that relations between the United States and Israel had reached their lowest point.
Her favorite name for Netanyahu was, “F____ Bibi.”
But it wasn’t just about her hatred of any particular Israeli leader. The same year that Hillary was yelling herself hoarse at a man who had fought terrorists on the battlefield, she addressed the , and blasted Israel and praised Islamic terrorists.
Hillary told the terror lobby, “I may have been the first person ever associated with an American administration to call for a Palestinian state.” She praised Mahmoud Abbas, the PA terror dictator , “There is no difference between our policies and those of Hamas.”
She celebrated Naomi Shihab Nye who had written of the Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli cities, “Oppression makes people do desperate things.” Echoing her, Hillary denounced the “indignity of occupation”. A few years later she accused Israelis of a lack of “empathy” in understanding “the pain of an oppressed people.”
Perhaps they were too busy mourning their dead to emphasize with the terrorists who were killing them.
But fighting for her political life, Hillary and Huma dug through her closet and threw on a blue and white pantsuit. Her campaign placed an editorial in headlined, “How I Would Reaffirm Unbreakable Bond With Israel — and Benjamin Netanyahu.”
Probably by yelling “F___ Bibi” at him for another 45 minutes.
When Hillary Clinton promised to reaffirm her “Unbreakable Bond With Israel — and Benjamin Netanyahu” it was in the pages of . And, striving to sell a rotten radical to skeptical Jews, the left-wing paper has decided to run a piece claiming that “Trump Would Be Israel’s Worst Nightmare”. As if anyone in Israel goes to bed dreaming of eight years of Hillary.
shares Hillary’s view of Netanyahu. And it violently loathes Israel.
Its quick costume change from denouncing anything and everything about the Jewish State to a sudden bout of concern for Israel is as unconvincing as Hillary Clinton’s southern accent.
Jay Michaelson, the author of the editorial warning us how bad Trump would be for Israel, followed that up with another piece accusing Israel of being an apartheid state. During Passover, Michaelson’s seething hatred for the Jewish State had pushed him to declare, “I’m Seeking Freedom From the Organized Jewish Community This Passover.”
Should American Jews take their cues on how dangerous Trump would be for Israel from a guy who hates Israel? Who hates Israel so much that he can’t even stand the Jewish community?
, like Hillary, hates Israel. Its pages are dedicated to rationalizing, justifying and defending the Muslim hatred of Israel and Jews. There’s Lisa Goldman explaining that the Muslim anti-Semitism displayed at the Rio Olympics was really a “Jewish persecution complex” that lacked “nuance.” It’s not an outlier. view of Israel is as hostile and negative as any white supremacist website.
Or Hillary Clinton’s inbox where the likes of Max Blumenthal regularly made appearances.
Do or Hillary Clinton actually care about Israel? All they’re trying to do is keep the American Jews who don’t believe that Israel is an apartheid state or that Muslim anti-Semitism is the fault of the Jews on the Democratic reservation by scaring them with bedtime stories about Trump.
Michaelson warns us that Trump would destabilize the Middle East and endanger Israel. It’s hard to imagine how he could do so more than Hillary’s Arab Spring which turned Egypt over to the Muslim Brotherhood, sowed terrorist dragon’s teeth across the region, including an ISIS affiliate in the Sinai.
Trump would destroy American credibility, he tells us. What credibility? Nobody thinks we have any credibility now. Not on Syria, Iran, Libya, China, Russia or anything else. And much of that took place under Hillary Clinton.
Then we are told that Trump is an “extremist” because “moderate Saudi businessmen” don’t like him.
Whom should American Jews better take their guidance from than “moderate Saudi businessmen”? Perhaps Jay Michaelson, Hillary Clinton and . It’s hard to tell who in that gruesome bunch hates Israel more.
The “moderate” Saudi businessman whom Michaelson quotes is Saudi Arabia’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. Alaweed had his post 9/11 donation thrown back in his face after blaming America for the attack. And Moussaoui, the 20 hijacker, claimed that he was an Al Qaeda supporter.
He had against Israel at a telethon whose host declared on television, “Do not have any mercy, neither compassion on the Jews, their blood, their money, their flesh. Their women are yours to take, legitimately. Allah made them yours. Why don't you enslave their women? Why don't you wage jihad? Why don't you pillage them?”
and Jay Michaelson would like American Jews to heed this warning about Trump’s extremism from a “moderate Saudi” who donated to the mass murder and rape of Jews.
Also, Jay Michaelson and warn American Jews not to vote for Trump because he “famously promised to “bomb the s___ out of ISIS.” This, according to Jay, ”would entail the murder of thousands of innocent people.” Some of whom might even be “moderate Saudi businessmen.”
Finally, we are warned that under Trump, “Egypt and Syria will soon resemble Hamas and Hezbollah: extremist, Islamist and violent.” This was formerly known as Obama and Hillary’s Arab Spring.
Michaelson contends that Republicans are voting from “that part of the brain that sends out constant ‘fight or flight’ messages based on threats and fear.” That’s an odd lack of self-awareness from a man who just desperately tried to hammer together some “fight or flight” messages on Trump.
But attacking Trump is easier than defending Hillary. And so we get this pathetic showing of Muslim terrorist financiers and Jewish anti-Semites against Trump. It’s as meaningful as Hillary’s pro-Israel pandering.
The real Hillary, the one caught with an inbox full of attacks on Israel, including approval for the bigotry of Max Blumenthal whose work was cited by the , is quite a different creature from the public Hillary who suddenly loves Israel.
The real Hillary, the one who kissed Arafat’s wife and listened placidly to her rant about Israeli poison gas, has a long anti-Israel history. Her time as Secretary of State has already given us a preview of her policies. She will continue demanding apartheid segregation for Jews living in ’67 Israel and she will go on pushing for more concessions to Islamic terrorists. She will back the Iran deal that she championed.
Hillary will go on financing Iran’s wave of Islamic terrorism while ignoring its nuclear violations.
But there is nothing extraordinary about any of this. Hillary is not a radical in a party of moderates. The Democratic Party has drifted so far into the fever swamps of the radical left that opposition to Israel is mainstream. The only reason that Hillary reserves her fulminations for phone calls and private emails is that even though her inner circle of advisers is vocally anti-Israel, some in her outer circle of donors are pro-Israel. And she still needs their support. At least while the election is still going on.
Israel has . Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton reversed JFK and LBJ’s pro-Israel policies. This rejection has been cloaked in euphemisms about “two states for two people”, but that really means championing the creation of Islamic terror states inside Israel.
This policy, which has until recently been bipartisan, represents the greatest threat to Israel.
Donald Trump is the first Republican presidential nominee to firmly break with it. Unlike Hillary, Trump hasn’t kissed Arafat’s wife or spent an hour on the phone yelling at the Prime Minister of Israel. Instead he has said that Jews should be able to keep on living and building houses in ’67 Israel.
Jews living as a free people in their own land is the essence of Zionism. And it’s a rejection of the hateful ravings of Hillary Clinton, the Forward and the “moderate” Saudi businessmen of Islamic terror.
Freedom Caucus weighs Syrian refugee fight on must-pass spending bill
Meanwhile, the Senate GOP is pushing a short-term stopgap to early December.
09/07/16 12:02 AM EDT
Updated 09/07/16 12:06 AM EDT
The House Freedom Caucus is targeting must-pass spending legislation as a potential bargaining chip to halt the Obama administration’s Syrian refugee resettlement program — a move sure to complicate GOP leaders’ hopes of heading off any government shut-down talk by quickly passing a stop-gap measure.
The proposal comes as Senate Republican leaders are planning a short-term government funding measure that runs until Dec. 9, multiple senior GOP sources said.
The GOP-led Senate plans to try and pass their short-term measure before the House, which typically moves first on spending bills, according to the sources — a strategy that may put pressure on the House to act swiftly before government funding runs dry Sept. 30. No decisions have been finalized, and a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said GOP senators plan to discuss the issue at a party lunch on Wednesday.
The Freedom Caucus, meanwhile, stopped short of adopting a formal strategy on the so-called continuing resolution. Many expected the caucus to vote on Tuesday to oppose a short-term stopgap spending measure that runs out in December. Several of their conservative allies off the Hill have asked leadership to punt any major budget decisions into spring of 2017.
But rather than flat-out opposing the short-term CR, the group of conservative lawmakers instead hashed out a preliminary plan to play hardball during its weekly meeting at Hunan Dynasty on Capitol Hill Tuesday evening.
They're planning to tell leadership they will back a short-term funding package if they can tuck in a bill by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) to stop the resettlement program until the administration “can assure no terrorists or individuals with radical sympathies or views will be admitted,” according to a summary of the bill.
While not an outright refusal to support a short-term CR, their demands could still spark a major legislative battle that gums up appropriations: While the refugees matter passed the House early this year, it died in the Senate, which needs Democratic votes to send anything to the president’s desk. Obama, likewise, is almost certain to reject a spending bill that includes such a provision.
“There was some discussion about doing a shorter-term CR if we had a commitment from leadership to attach and keep attached a pause on Syrian Refugees coming in until we have a better vetting system to identity the terrorists,” said one Freedom Caucus member who asked not to be identified. “We haven’t taken a formal position, but there was a lot of discussion about that and many of the members felt that was a reasonable request.”
The pitch, which has yet to be made to House Republican leadership, represents the conservative group’s opening bid in their negotiations with GOP leaders. Congress must pass a spending bill by the end of September to keep the government running and avoid a shutdown.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has dangled the specter of a government shutdown if Republicans — and conservatives in the House Freedom Caucus, in particular — try and force a spending measure that runs until March 2017.
Though some GOP senators such as Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas personally favor that six-month option, Senate Republicans generally prefer a funding bill into December which would allow the conference to maintain some leverage in major spending decisions should they lose control of the Senate in November.
“Our intention is to move a bill that takes us through after the election and into December sometime,” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 3 Senate Republican, told reporters earlier Tuesday afternoon.
“Our number one goal is not to have a long-term CR,” added New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, the third-ranking Senate Democrat, on Tuesday.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) said he would like to see a short-term measure run through mid-December, which would give House and Senate appropriators an opportunity to pass individual spending bills during the lame-duck session or package them together in an omnibus or "mini-bus" package.
Rogers noted that the House Appropriations Committee passed all 12 spending bills, and that each one includes dozens of GOP policy and funding priorities. Enacting a CR that lasts into next year would cost Republicans all those initiatives, something Rogers is loath to do.
By NAHAL TOOSI
"I'm not willing at this point in jettisoning the power of the purse," Rogers told reporters on Tuesday. "Consequently, I'd like to see a CR until the middle of December to give us a chance to try to put together a 'minibuses' or perhaps even something I hate, and that's an omnibus."
The Freedom Caucus position comes as the Obama administration announced late last month that it reached its goal of admitting at least 10,000 refugees from Syria this fiscal year -- one month ahead of schedule.
Congressional Republicans and a slew of GOP governors around the country had raised concerns about refugees from Syria and whether they are sufficiently vetted for potential terrorist ties in the wake of attacks in the United States and Europe. A passport initially believed to have belonged to a Syrian refugee was discovered near the body of one of the Paris attackers, although that document was later found to be fake.
Refugee applicants are among the most tightly vetted immigrants into the United States, with a screening process that can take up to 24 months. The House passed legislation last fall on a 289-137 vote that would toughen the vetting process even further, though the measure was blocked in the Senate.
The Freedom Caucus doesn’t appear to be the only group with reservations on a short-term CR. Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas), chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, said it’s not just conservative hardliners who are opposed to a stopgap bill that dredges spending issues up again in December.
“Let’s keep it out of the lame duck,” Flores told reporters outside of the Speaker’s Lobby Tuesday night. Flores said that’s not an official RSC position, at least not yet, but is a “broad conservative position.”
He didn’t offer specifics when asked how many of the 178-member caucus share his views, only saying it’s “not an insignificant number.”
“The bulk of conservatives in Congress want that out of the lame duck.
They don’t want it to land in the lame duck. They want it to land sometime next year,” he added.
Flores’ comments, seemingly putting him in line with the House Freedom Caucus, come amid reports that at least a handful of HFC lawmakers are considering abandoning the RSC next Congress.
“First of all, nobody has talked to me,” Flores told POLITICO when asked about the rumors. “The only names that are mentioned are [Reps. Mick] Mulvaney and Mark Meadows. If there were going to be some kind of exodus, I would’ve heard about it.”
John Bresnahan contributed to this report.
The Real Iranian Deal
Iran can delay inspections by 24 days or dragged out for 3 months.
Media : No US inspectors w/ IAEA http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-u-s-banned-from-knowing-details-of-iran-nuke-agreement/
Iran can make contracts with China and Russia and we will have no ability to change those contracts. If re-impositions of sanctions occur, Iran’s contracts up until that point are grandfathered in and not able to be sanctioned
This deal ends the UN Security Council Resolution 1929 which stated Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles, new deal says Iran is “called upon” to not make ballistic missiles.
In 10 years resolutions will be terminated
IAEA report will be completed by Oct. 15 2015 and final assessment will be complete by Dec. 15, 2015
18. Terminates all provisions of previous UN Security Council resolutions on the Iranian nuclear issue.
19. Terminates financial sanctions
-Transfers funds between EU and entities and Iranian person and entities.
-Allows banking including new banking relationships EU territories new Iranian banks.
-Financial support for trade with Iran.
-Allows loans to Iranian government
-Allows import/export of Iranian oil, gas, petroleum and petrochemical products.
-Allows export of key equipment or technology for oil, gas, petroleum and petrochemical sectors.
-Allows f or investment in oil, gas, petroleum, and petrochemicals sectors.
-Export of key naval equipment and technology.
-Allows the design and constructions of cargo vessels and oil tankers.
-Access to EU airports of Iranian cargo flights and takes away the inspection of these.
-Exports of gold, and other precious metals and diamonds.
-Delivery of Iranian banknotes and coinage
-Export of raw materials such as aluminum and steel.
20. EU will terminate all provisions of the EU regulating proliferation related sanctions 8 years after deal is adopted.
Adopting trade in Iran s automotive sector
22. US will allow for the sale of commercial passenger aircraft and parts and service for them. We will license non-US persons that are owned or controlled by a US person to engage in activities with Iran.
License import of Iranian carpets and foodstuff
23. 8 years after adoption or earlier will seek legislative action if appropriate to terminate sanctions.
24. Iran can consult with JCPOA if they think any measure is too restrictive to their nuclear program.
25. If a law at the state or local level in US is preventing JCPOA implementation ,US must change policies to allow for JCPOA to be implemented.
26. EU can’t re-introduce or impose sanctions that have been terminated. There will be no new nuclear related UN Security Council sanctions and no new EU nuclear related sanctions or restrictive measures. US will sustain JCPOA and prevent interferences in it.
US Administration including the President and Congress will refrain from re-introducing or re-imposing sanctions that it have ceased under the JCPOA. US will refrain from imposing new nuclear related sanctions.
If Iran considers something intrusive they can use this as grounds to cease performing it’s commitment in whole or part.
29. EU and Members and US will refrain from any policy specifically intended to directly or adversely affect the normalization of trade and economic relations with Iran.
31. US will remove designation of certain entities and individuals on the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List and entities and individuals listed on the Foreign Sanctions Evaders List.
33. E3/E+3 and Iran will agree to steps to ensure Iran’s access in areas of trade, technology, finance and energy.
76. If IAEA wants to have access to a location they must provide Iran with reasons for this in written format.
Inspections will cease as well as seizure and disposal by the EU Members states of cargoes to and from Iran and their territories.
Here's where you can enter in text. Feel free to edit, move, delete or add a different page element.
We are an organization of professionals from around the state of California and welcome any kind of support. We are committed to working together for the betterment of the state and it's policies.
CA Tea Party Groups Coalition*
c/o SoCal Tax Revolt Coalition Inc.
3245 University Ave
San Diego, CA 92104
Phone: 619 606-0337
*a project of SoCal Tax Revolt Coalition Inc.