Is Barack Obama Really Privately Promising Elizabeth Warren His Support Against Hillary Clinton In 2016?
In the end, is there really any difference between Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren? I think not.
According to a NY Post article, President Barack Obama has quietly promised Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) complete support if she runs for president. That would be quite something since Hillary was Obama’s Secretary of State and had it not been for Bill Clinton’s speech at the Democrat National Convention in 2012, Obama most likely would have not been reelected. And what about VP Joe Biden, what if he runs? However, to date Warren has claimed that she has no intention of running for president in 2016. But if she does become convinced to run in the Democrat primary, it would most likely cause a fissure in the Democrat Party and a political Civil War the likes we have not seen in years.
Of course I am going to back you in 2016 against Hillary Clinton
Of course I am going to back you Hillary in 2016
President Obama has quietly promised Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren complete support if she runs for president — a stinging rebuke to his nemesis Hillary Clinton, sources tell me.
Publicly, Obama has remained noncommittal on the 2016 race, but privately he worries that Clinton would undo and undermine many of his policies. There’s also a personal animosity, especially with Bill Clinton, that dates from their tough race six years ago.
A former Harvard law professor and administration aide, Warren would energize the left wing of the Democrat Party just as Obama did against Clinton in 2008.
Thanks to her outspoken stand against big banks and the top 1 percent, Warren is the darling of progressives. She won her Senate seat thanks to millions of dollars in donations from outside Massachusetts, including from rich environmentalists and Hollywood celebrities.
Barack Obama’s fear is that Hillary Clinton will undo many of Obama’s policies. Really, like what? Make no mistake out it America, Hillary Clinton is as liberal, if not more than Obama. The only difference is that she at many times lies about her true colors. She is certainly even more liberal than her husband Bubba. Hillary will not undo Obamacare, she is the Grandmother of Obamacare. She has pretty much painted herself into a corner defending Obama’s policies as a senator and Secretary of State. Face it, Hillary is just as much of an ideological as Obama. She is more like Obama, than her husband Bill Clinton.
Obama has authorized his chief political adviser, Valerie Jarrett, to conduct a full-court press to convince Warren to throw her hat into the ring.
In the past several weeks, Jarrett has held a series of secret meetings with Warren. During these meetings, Jarrett has explained to Warren that Obama is worried that if Hillary succeeds him in the White House, she will undo many of his policies.
He believes that the populist Warren is the best person to convince the party faithful that Hillary is out of touch with poor Americans and the middle class. Warren, in his view, would carry on the Obama legacy after he leaves the White House.
If this does come to fruition, it will be more about a power-play of who has the power in the Democrat party than Obama believing Hillary will change his policies. It is about the tension that still exists between the Clinton’s and Obama from 2008. However, make no mistake about it, if Elizabeth Warren does run, it will be a battle Royal for the soul of the Democrat party and all will see just how radically liberal and socialist the Democrat party has truly become.
File this one under, tell me something we do not already know … OBAMA IS THE WORST PRESIDENT!
According to a new Quinnipiac University poll, Americans say that Obama is the worst post-WWII president of them all. It would appear that Barack Obama is not the one that “we’ve been waiting for”, actually far from it. Just think, Obama is already at the bottom of the list and his presidency is not even over, sadly. Look for this poll number to go down even further as the US economy continues to struggle, the Middle East continues in turmoil and the scandals mount. Ronald Reagan is far and away considered the best president. What does it say when a current sitting US president is considered worse than Richard Nixon, who had to resign and leave office in disgrace because of “Watergate” before he was impeached? Had it not been for a liberal media refusing to dig deeper in to the all too numerous Obama administration scandals like a Woodward and Bernstein, Obama would have a 20% approval rating and been impeached.
Not only do Americans say that Obama is the worst post-WWII president, they also have “buyer’s remorse” as 45% of voters say that America would be better off had Mitt Romney been elected president in 2012, while 38% believe the country would be worse off. This includes independent voters 47 – 33, who wish they could get a Mulligan and have a do-over to elect Romney. Hot Air opines, “If independents have double-digit buyer’s remorse from 2012, that suggests a strong desire to make up for their earlier mistake.”
President Barack Obama is the worst president since World War II, 33 percent of American voters say in a Quinnipiac University National Poll released today. Another 28 percent pick President George W. Bush.
Ronald Reagan is the best president since WWII, 35 percent of voters say, with 18 percent for Bill Clinton, 15 percent for John F. Kennedy and 8 percent for Obama, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds. Among Democrats, 34 percent say Clinton is the best president, with 18 percent each for Obama and Kennedy.
Obama has been a better president than George W. Bush, 39 percent of voters say, while 40 percent say he is worse. Men say 43 – 36 percent that Obama is worse than Bush while women say 42 – 38 percent he is better. Obama is worse, Republicans say 79 – 7 percent and independent voters say 41 – 31 percent. Democrats say 78 – 4 percent that he is better.
My list of worst post WWII presidents would be as follows: 1) Barack Obama, 2) Jimmy Carter, 3) Gerald Ford, although not sure if he should even count, 4) Richard Nixon, 5) LBJ 6) Bill Clinton, 7) GWB, 8) GHWB, 9) JFK, 10) Eisenhower. Ronald Reagan and Harry S Truman would not even get a vote to be on this list.
I would actually go one further, Obama may just be the worst president since WWI. Hell, for that fact Obama is the worst president since The Revolutionary War of American Independence.
CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley Interview of Lois Lerner’s Attorney William Taylor III … He Actually Made it Worse, “I get that it’s convenient to create suspicion”.
So let’s understand this, Lois Lerner pleads the 5th, yet her attorney goes on the liberal media to speak for her?
William Taylor III, former IRS employee Lois Lerner’s attorney, went on CNN this Sunday in an interview on ‘State of the Union’ with Candy Crowley and actually made matters worse. His client has decided not to testify in front of Congress as she Plead her Fifth and applied her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. So then why do we need to hear anything from her attorney? If Lerner and her missing emails does not have the honor to tell what happened and her involvement in the IRS scandal of targeting conservative non-profit groups, then we really do not need to hear spin from an attorney. Hey Lois, Put up or shut up! Her mouth piece tried to divert the story by saying, “There’s 2,000 e-mail crashes – there’s 2,000 computer crashes in the IRS since January 1 of this year.” However, when asked by Crowley whether all of the computer crashes were irretrievable, he had no idea. And their lies the rub. Let’s look into those 2000 email crashes, other than the ones that are connected to IRS-gate and see how the IRS handled those. What a novel concept.
TAYLOR: There’s 2,000 e-mail crashes – there’s 2,000 computer crashes in the IRS since January 1 of this year. It’s no – it’s not…
CROWLEY: Are all of them irretrievable?
TAYLOR: I don’t know, but I…
Then Taylor stated that Lois Lerner was upset as anybody when she walked into the office and her screen was blue, having lost all her emails. They called the IT guys in but never bothered to contact the tape retrieval back up? Hmm, then why so silent Lois? If you were so upset and have nothing to hide and have done nothing wrong, why plead the 5th, not once … but twice?
Attorney William Taylor III then channeled his inner Hillary Clinton and blames a “vast Right Wing conspiracy” for Lois Lerner’s emails. He had the nerve to say that the GOP was politicizing IRS-gate when the reality is this IRS scandal took place to fix an election. Lerner and the IRS contributed in the swaying of an election in 2012 and now her lawyer says she will not be a political, election year scapegoat. Seriously? Taylor said his client did nothing wrong and did not violate the paperwork – federal paperwork law. Oops, then Taylor said, “She printed out some things, not others.” Hey dude, you don’t get to pick and choose with the federal law of backing up emails.
TAYLOR: He called me – he called me one, too. And I won’t respond to that, except that – except to say he’s wrong.
It’s convenient. This is an election-year politics. It’s convenient to have a demon that they can create and point to. Let me tell you something basic about this. People who want to give money to elections and do so in a tax-free way have to submit themselves to the scrutiny of the IRS to be sure that they’re complying with the rules that limit political activity.
If the IRS is not looking at political activity in the (c)(4) applications, which is what this is, they’re not doing what they’re supposed to be doing. So, it’s like saying they’re examining us for political activity, when that’s exactly the criteria that they’re submitting for their applications.
CROWLEY: Did your client violate the paperwork – federal paperwork law?
TAYLOR: No. She did exactly what the IRS required that she do.
CROWLEY: But she didn’t back up her e-mails, which was IRS – you’re supposed to print out things.
TAYLOR: She printed out some things, not others. You can’t print out hundreds of thousands of e-mails. We will be back – we will be back to the days…
TAYLOR: Well, it’s not just what she said. The record that was created at the time in terms of e-mails is undisputed.
She walked into the office one day, and her screen went blue. She asked for help in restoring it. And the I.T. people came and attempted to restore it. They even went so far as to send it to another expert to try to restore the e-mails.
There’s 2,000 e-mail crashes – there’s 2,000 computer crashes in the IRS since January 1 of this year. It’s no – it’s not…
CROWLEY: Are all of them irretrievable?
TAYLOR: I don’t know, but I…
CROWLEY: I think that’s what is sort of blowing people’s minds, is, we get it that computers crash. But to then say, you know what, we couldn’t get it, and so then we shredded the hard drive, you know, as an attorney, that that’s one of the things you would pounce on and go whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute.
TAYLOR: But, you know, you do the best you can under the circumstances. Nobody was thinking about trying to keep anything from being discovered.
She was as upset as anybody else was about the loss of the e-mails and the other documents which were on there, which were quite important to her. But the truth is, this – this was one of those things that happened. At the time, she did everything she could to retrieve it. She reported it right away, and that’s the story. That’s all there is to it.
IRS Admits Illegally Leaking Confidential “National Organization of Marriage” Information That Was Used Against Mitt Romney in 2012 Elections
UNREAL … BUSTED!!! MORE ILLEGAL GOINGS-ON AT THE IRS … AND THIS IS THE AGENCY IN CHARGE OF ENFORCING OBAMACARE.
More IRS corruption … The IRS was forced to admit this week to leaking the National Organization for Marriage‘s confidential information to far left groups, the Human Rights Campaign. The Daily Signal is reporting that the Internal Revenue Service has admitted wrongdoing and agreed to settle the resulting lawsuit for illegally releasing confidential tax return and donor list of the National Organization of Marriage, a national group opposed to redefining marriage.
The IRS will pay the National Organization for Marriage $50,000. That’s it? Was anyone fired? How about jail?
Two years after activists for same-sex marriage obtained the confidential tax return and donor list of a national group opposed to redefining marriage, the Internal Revenue Service has admitted wrongdoing and agreed to settle the resulting lawsuit.
The Daily Signal has learned that, under a consent judgment today, the IRS agreed to pay $50,000 in damages to the National Organization for Marriage as a result of the unlawful release of the confidential information to a gay rights group, the Human Rights Campaign, that is NOM’s chief political rival.
“Congress made the disclosure of confidential tax return information a serious matter for a reason,” NOM Chairman John D. Eastman told The Daily Signal. “We’re delighted that the IRS has now been held accountable for the illegal disclosure of our list of major donors from our tax return.”
The Daily Signal is seeking comment on the settlement from the IRS and Justice Department.
Oh the sick irony. The IRS will pay the National Organization for Marriage $50,000 of our own money.
NOM said that an investigation revealed that its 2008 tax return and list of major donors was released to Matthew Meisel, a gay activist in Boston, MA. Email correspondence from Meisel revealed that he told a colleague that he had “a conduit” to obtain NOM’s confidential information. While testifying under oath in a deposition in the litigation, Meisel invoked the 5th Amendment against self-incrimination and refused to disclose the identity of his conduit. Documents obtained during the litigation prove that Meisel then provided NOM’s tax data to the Human Rights Campaign (whose president was a national Co-Chair of the Obama Reelection Campaign). The information was also published by the Huffington Post.
“While we are very pleased that the IRS has been exposed as being responsible for this leak of our confidential information to our political opponents, we believe the IRS may still be hiding information from the American people,” Eastman said. “We have called on the Attorney General to grant Matthew Meisel immunity from prosecution so that we can force him to disclose the identity of his conduit . We urge the Congress to explore this issue with the appropriate government officials. It’s imperative that all those who have engaged in corrupt practices and illegal acts in the IRS be identified and held accountable.”
WOW, Just WOW … Dave Brat Defeats Incumbent Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in Virginia GOP Primary, 55.5% – 44.5%
Establishment Republicans were rocked this evening when US Rep. Eric Cantor, the Republican House Majority Leader lost to virtual unknown Dave Brat. To borrow a line from Al Michaels from the 1980 Winter Olympics in Lake Placid, NY was the USA defeated the Soviet Union, “Do you believe in Miracles … YES!!! It was thought by many in the establishment that Cantor was the next in line for the Speakership; however, “We the People” had other ideas. So much for the notion that money wins these elections, Brat trailed Cantor in fundraising, pulling in $200,000 this cycle compared to Cantor’s $2 million.
In an upset for the ages, Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, the second-most powerful man in the House, was dethroned Tuesday by a little-known, tea party-backed Republican primary challenger carried to victory on a wave of public anger over calls for looser immigration laws.
“”This is a miracle from God that just happened,” exulted David Brat, a political science professor, as his victory became clear in the congressional district around Virginia capital city.
Speaking to downcast supporters, Cantor conceded, “Obviously we came up short” in a bid for renomination to an eighth term.
The victory was by far the biggest of the 2014 campaign season for tea party forces, although last week they forced veteran Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran into a June 24 runoff, and hope State Sen. Chris McDaniel can prevail then.
So much for Eric Cantor’s internal polling that showed him ahead of David Brat by 34 points. Oops, missed it by that much.
The poll, shared with Post Politics, shows Cantor with a 62 percent to 28 percent lead over Brat, an economics professor running to Cantor’s right. Eleven percent say they are undecided.
The internal survey of 400 likely Republican primary voters was conducted May 27 and 28 by John McLaughlin of McLaughlin & Associates. It carries a margin of error of +/-4.9 percentage points.
Cantor conceded the race around 8:25 p.m. — shortly after the Associated Press pronounced Cantor’s 13-year political career at least temporarily over. With nearly 98 percent of precincts reporting, Brat had 55 percent of the vote, while Cantor had 44 percent. People close to Cantor said internal polls showed him hovering near 60 percent in the runup to the race.
It’s one of the most stunning losses in modern House politics, and completely upends the GOP hierarchy in both Virginia and Washington. Cantor enjoyed a meteoric rise that took him from chief deputy whip, to minority whip to majority leader in the span of 13 years.
Cantor was seen by many as the next speaker of the House, biding his time until Ohio Rep. John Boehner wanted to retire.
UPDATE I: Victory Speech … Dollars do not Vote, You Do!
State Senator Joni Ernst Wins GOP Iowa Primary Going Away … Faces Democrat Bruce Braley for Open Iowa Senate Seat
State Senator Joni Ernst wins Republican primary in Iowa, set to face Democrat Bruce Braley for US Senate race in pivotal battle in 2014 for the US Senate.
It did not take long last night after the polls closed in Iowa as the AP called the GOP US Senate primary for state senator Joni Ernst. With just 24% of precincts reporting, the AP made the call for Joni Ernst who had 53% of the vote, Conservative radio host Sam Clovis had 19%, businessman Mark Jacobs (R) had 17% and former U.S. Attorney Matt Whitaker (R) had 9%. However, by the time all the votes were counted Ernst would win the Iowa Republican senate primary by an even wider margin gaining 56.2% of the vote. Ernst easily cleared the 35 percent threshold necessary to avoid a convention nomination fight. Republican Joni Ernst will face Democrat Bruce Braley this November for the Iowa senate seat currently held by the retiring Democrat Sen. Tom Harkin.
Joni Ernst, who highlighted her ability to shoot guns and castrate hogs to overcome disinterest in a sleepy primary election, tonight racked up enough votes to become the first female GOP U.S. Senate nominee in Iowa history.
The Associated Press called the race shortly before 10 p.m.
The 43-year-old farmer’s daughter turned state senator and military commander eclipsed the 35 percent necessary to claim victory over her four competitors, including retired businessman Mark Jacobs, who tried to overpower the rest of the field by self-funding his campaign with millions from his own wealth.
Vote for Jodi Ernst and let her trim the pork in Washington, DC … its a simple choice for Iowa voters.
Washington is full of big spenders, let’s make them squeal
“This campaign will come down to a very simple choice: our shared Iowa values, versus Bruce Braley’s liberal Washington values,” Ernst said.
According to the statement, Ernst, a lieutenant colonel in the National Guard who served a tour in Iraq, will start a statewide tour on Wednesday alongside Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad and Lt. Gov. Kim Reynolds. She’s due to report for National Guard duty once that tour ends, the statement says without giving an exact time-frame.
Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell defeated his GOP Tea Party challenger Matt Bevin in the Kentucky primary by 25%, just one of many races on Super Primary Tuesday. There is a saying, we get the government that we voted for. With so many people claiming to be tired of the same old way that Washington DC is run … last night in primaries across the United States on both sides, the same old establishment candidates won. In Georgia, a Senate Republican primary headed to a runoff with the two candidates, ex-CEO of Dollar General David Perdue and Rep. Jack Kingston.
Mitch McConnell and Alison Lundergan Grimes ran victory laps Tuesday in Kentucky as they rallied their party faithful to nominate them for a colossal showdown in November that could help decide which party controls the U.S. Senate.
Grimes, Kentucky’s Democratic Secretary of State, rolled to victory over nominal primary opposition. And McConnell easily defeated tea party-backed challenger Matt Bevin, who spent $3.3 million in his failed bid to oust the five-term Republican Senate leader.
Um, isn’t Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell one of those powers to be that he is referencing in his own speech?
As Powerline opines, it is time for Republicans and Conservatives to understand who is their greater foe, “As John has pointed out, McConnell’s lifetime ACU rating, after 28 years in the Senate, ‘is certifiably right-wing at 90%.’ Given that record and the importance of wresting control of the Senate away from Harry Reid and the Democrats, it’s difficult to believe that Republicans will not unite behind McConnell in the fight against Grimes.”
Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) Calls Benghazi Special Committee: ‘It’s a Hunting Mission for a Lynch Mob”
I think the Democrats protest too much …
On Sunday during CNN’s State of the Union with Candy Crowley, liberal Senator Dianne Feinstein D-CA) called the House Select Committee on Benghazi is “ridiculous.” and said … “I think it’s a hunting mission for a lynch mob.” However, the American people overwhelmingly think different from Di-Fi as 67% support the creation of a Benghazi Special Committee and 51% believe the Obama Administration knowingly lied about blaiming a video tape for the terror attack for political purposes.
Full transcript HERE.
For Democrats, its all about protecting Hillary Clinton’s back side at this point for 2016.
Hey Liberals, Remember When Sarah Palin Predicted in 2008 That If Obama was Elected President, Putin and Russia Would Invade Ukraine … SHE WAS RIGHT!
HEY AMERICA, HOW’S THAT “HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF” WORKING OUT FOR YA?
Remember in 2008 when then GOP Vice Presidential nominee said during a campaign rally in a Reno, Nevada, “After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.” Palin was mocked profusely for her comments by the Left and the liberal MSM. Flash-forward to present day … GUESS WHO WAS CORRECT? Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is now saying “I told you so” from her Facebook page following reports of a Putin – Russian “military invasion” in the Crimean area of Ukraine.
Um, I’m usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did …
Yes, I could see this one from Alaska. I’m usually not one to Told-Ya-So, but I did, despite my accurate prediction being derided as “an extremely far-fetched scenario” by the “high-brow” Foreign Policy magazine. Here’s what this “stupid” “insipid woman” predicted back in 2008: “After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.”
With special thanks to JWF, they found this liberal gem from the past where Sarah Palin was mocked for her foreign policy comments regarding what would happen between Russian and Ukraine if Barack Obama was elected in 2008.
Palin helpfully offered four scenarios for such a crisis, one of which was this strange one:
After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama’s reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia’s Putin to invade Ukraine next.
As we’ve said before, this is an extremely far-fetched scenario. And given how Russia has been able to unsettle Ukraine’s pro-Western government without firing a shot, I don’t see why violence would be necessary to bring Kiev to heel. Watch the upcoming parliamentary elections in December to see if Moscow gets the pliable new government it wants.
So where are all those Democrats, Libs and liberal media types with their apologies? Doesn’t it just crush liberals that Sarah Palin was more correct on Russia than their Obamamessiah.
Remember When Barack Obama Ridiculed Mitt Romney During 2012 Presidential Debates about Russia … ‘1980s Are Calling to Ask for Their Foreign Policy Back’ … How Do Those “Rose Colored” Glasses Fit There Barack?
Yet another reason why you don’t elect, let alone reelect SNARK or a Campaigner is Chief …
Remember when Barack Obama made the snide, wise-a$$, ridiculing comment during the 2012 presidential debates to GOP candidate Mitt Romney regarding Russia and that the 1980′s want their foreign policy back? And everyone thought Obama was so cute making such a witty comment. So what do you think of Obama’s comments now as Russia and Vladimir Putin have invaded Ukraine. Just curious America, how’s that “Hopey-Changey” stuff working out for ya? Where is your
Moses Obamamessiah now? By the way Barack, how do those rose colored glasses fit?
Fox News’ Bret Baier opened a segment of his show Friday night by flashing back to an October 2012 presidential debate where President Obama ridiculed Republican presidential nominee Romney about his concern over Russia’s “geo-political” threat.
“You said Russia. Not Al Qaida. You said Russia,” Obama said regarding biggest threats. “The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because…the cold war’s been over for 20 years.”
Mitt Romney’s intelligent, powerful and correct retort was as follows:
“Russia, I indicated, is a geopolitical foe … and I said in the same paragraph I said and Iran is the greatest national security threat we face. Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin …”
Is it any wonder why at this moment so many Americans wish that had a do-over of the 2012 presidential election and they would not vote for Barack Obama. He has been wrong and an epic failure on everything in be domestic and foreign policy. What else would you expect but snark from an individual who was completely unqualified to be president?