THANKS BARACK OBAMA …
Welcome to Obama’s 2014 Thanksgiving for America. As reported at CNS News, nearly one in five U.S. households will celebrate Thanksgiving on food stamps this year, according to the latest data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture on participation in the Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program. Don’t worry though, the Obama’s wont go without, let them eat
They don’t call him the Food Stamp president for nothing. But then again, he likes a government dependent class of people.
As of this August, according to the most recent data released by USDA, there were 22,729,389 households on food stamps. That equaled 19.75 percent of 115,048,000 households in the country at that time.
In each of the two previous fiscal years, the percentage of American households on food stamps in the average was near 20 percent, hitting 19.4 percent in 2012, 20.4 percent in 2013.
As of August, according to the Department of Agriculture, there were 46,484,828 individuals in the food stamp program.
Barack Obama Just Admitted to Immigration Hecklers that He Shredded the US Constritution … “I Just Took an Action to Change the Law”
HEY CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS AND THE SUPREME COURT, PAY CLOSE ATTENTION THE WORDS THAT JUST CAME OUT OF PRESIDENT OBAMA’S OWN MOUTH …
While speaking Tuesday in Chicago pandering to Hispanics and discussing his recent executive order regarding amnesty for illegal immigrants, President Barack Obama went off script and actually spoke the truth. Obama stated to the hecklers, “I just took an action to change the law”. It was only last week that the White House was defending Obama’s Unconstitutional executive amnesty order as making changes within the existing law. Hmm, it sounds like he just admitted that he “took an action to change a law, PERIOD! Obama so wanted to be liked by the crowd and garner their cheers and adulation that he spoke the truth. Too bad he had no Constitutional right to do so. To hell with the separation of powers.
“All right, OK. OK. I understand,” Obama told the protesters after letting them go on for some time. “Listen. Hold on, hold on, hold on. Young lady, young lady, don’t just — don’t just start — don’t just start yelling, young ladies. Sir, why don’t you sit down, too?
“Listen, you know — here. Can I just say this, all right? I’ve listened to you. I heard you. I heard you. I heard you. All right? Now I have been respectful, I let you holler. All right? So let me just — nobody is removing you. I have heard you, but you have got to listen to me, too. All right? And I understand you may disagree, I understand you may disagree. But we have got to be able to talk honestly about these issues, all right?
“Now, you’re absolutely right that there have been significant numbers of deportations. That’s true. But what you are not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law.”
Ben Shapiro of Breitbart News Nails It … Ferguson, MO Grand Jury Verdict of No Indictment for Officer Wlson Explodes Media’s Lying Racial Narrative
THE LYING LIBERAL MEDIA HAS THEIR FALSE RACIAL NARRATIVE EXPOSED …
For a great read of a post-analysis of what transpired in Ferguson, Missouri and the liberal media’s lying racial narrative being exposed for the garbage it was, check out Ben Shapiro’s, Senior Editor-At-Large of Breitbart News, article at Breitbart.com … ‘Ferguson Verdict Explodes Media’s Lying Racial Narrative.’ As many times before, the MSM tried to create a story that belied the facts. The media ran with an out of control white cop who killed an innocent and unarmed black young man, a “gentle giant.” They ran with the story, not because it was true, but because they wanted it to be true. It gets old that we are continually told the same race-baiting story. It is Ben Shapiro’s final analysis that nails the media for the lie that their racial narrative truly is. Believe it or not, “every black man shot by police is not a Selma marcher.”
Truthfully, the angry and sullen reactions of those who wanted Wilson tried are understandable. They’re understandable because most Americans live in the evidence-free narrative created by malicious media liars, and the politicians they enable. They live in the evidence-free world of the political left, which maintains that America remains deeply racist, that every white cop is Bull Connor, and that every black man shot by police is a Selma marcher. So long as they live in that world, racial reconciliation will remain a dream, and racial polarization will remain a tool of the political and media elite to sell papers, raise cash, and drive votes.
Ferguson Verdict Explodes Media’s Lying Racial Narrative:
Just as the media did during the George Zimmerman trial and in the aftermath of Zimmerman’s shooting of Trayvon Martin, the media attempted to cram the square peg of the Wilson-Brown shooting into the round hole of white police racism. That meant portraying Brown as the latest sainted racial victim; this time, rather than the Trayvon Martin narrative of hoodies, Skittles, and iced tea, the media hit upon the notion that Brown was a “gentle giant.” The Brown family, Al Sharpton, MSNBC, CNN, The Washington Post, and other major media outlets ran with the story that Brown was a “gentle giant” who wouldn’t hurt a fly.
Then, it turned out that Brown had robbed a convenience store minutes before his altercation with Wilson.
Similarly, the media trotted out the story of Dorian Johnson, Brown’s friend, who said that Brown held his hands up in surrender after being shot in the back, and that Wilson executed Brown. The entire media ran with that one originally; the lie spawned an entire “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” movement. Of course, it later turned out that Johnson had helped Brown rob the store, and that all available autopsy evidence contradicted Johnson’s story.
But never mind: the media had somehow turned the true story of Michael Brown – the story of a 6’5”, 289-lb. 18-year-old strong-arm-robbing a convenience store, confronting a police officer and attempting to take his gun, running away, turning back to charge that officer, and being shot multiple times – into the story of Emmett Till. Never mind that there was not a single shred of evidence suggesting that Wilson targeted Brown based on race; never mind that Brown matched the description of the robbery suspect because he was the robbery suspect; never mind that Brown attacked an officer twice. No, this was a pre-ordained narrative for the media: white racist police officer strikes down young black unarmed man. The result of that overwrought and outright false media-generated controversy: extended riots in Ferguson.
The story beat the facts. So the media ran with the story.
So did President Obama. In 2013, Obama told America that Trayvon Martin could have been his son; in this case, Obama told the United Nations that riots in Ferguson represented America’s nasty racial legacy.
As the grand jury verdict neared release, the media built up the story. We were warned of riots if Wilson escaped indictment; Erin Burnett of CNN said that such a verdict would be the “nuclear option.” Nancy Grace of Court TV helpfully added that Michael Brown’s height did not “mean he was a violent teen.” And the Brown family attorney, Benjamin Crump, openly stated that the grand jury was corrupt, long before the verdict.
Predictably enough, the Michael Brown case fell apart the moment it hit the legal system. It turns out, as Robert McCulloch said, that evidence still trumps media hype in the legal system – at least sometimes.
Posted November 26, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
Barack Obama, Black America, Blacks, CNN, Democrat-Media Complex, Democrat/Obama Propaganda, Divider in Chief, George Zimmerman, Law Enforcement, Legal - Court Room - Trial, Liars, Media, Media Bias, Minorities, Misleader, Misrepresentation, MSNBC, No Justice, No Peace, Race Card, Racism, Trayvon Martin | no comments
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Says Dems Screwed Up Passing Obamacare … “Democrats Blew the Opportunity the American People Gave Them” in 2008 and “Put All of Our Focus on the Wrong Problem”
ISN’T THIS INTERESTING, DEMOCRAT CHUCKY SCHUMER SAYS THAT DEMOCRATS SCREWED UP PASSING OBAMACARE …
Speaking Tuesday at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, New York Democrat Sen. Charles Schumer had an epiphany and stated that “Democrats blew the opportunity the American people gave them” after the 2008 election. Schumer went on to say that, “We took their mandate and put all of our focus on the wrong problem, health care reform.” Gee, ya think? Sen. Schumer was one of the 60 Democrat senators who passed Obamacare, with not one GOP vote, and forced the unpopular law down the throats of Americans. Now suddenly because as we predicted back then, it would be their undoing, Schumer has misgivings that Democrats focused on it first and did not focus on what Americans were dealing with on a day to day basis, a poor economy and unemployment. Schumer told those in attendance “that considering 85% of all Americans got their health care from either the government, Medicare, Medicaid, or their employer … we would still only be talking about only 5% of the electorate.” Wasn’t that the same argument that those opposed to Obamacare were making in 2009? Why blow up the healthcare system in the United States for only 5% of the people? This is a kin to demolishing a house because the back porch needs repair. Not only did Democrats not listen to the people, the law they forced upon them was nothing more than a lie.
Democrats made a strategic mistake by passing the Affordable Care Act, Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the third-ranking member of the Senate Democratic leadership, said Tuesday.
Schumer says Democrats “blew the opportunity the American people gave them” in the 2008 elections, a Democratic landslide, by focusing on healthcare reform instead of legislation to boost the middle class.
But why is Sen. Schumer talking about the Democrats disastrous decision to pass Obamacare now, is it because they have buyer’s remorse and care about the American people? Not at all, it is because they have taken a political shellacking in 2010 and 2014 and now find themselves in the minority in the House and the Senate. It all has to do with power, not the people. Honestly, who in their right mind thought that an unpopular bill that adversely affected so many people to only benefit a few would not have ramifications? If Democrats could not see that, then they deserve what they got.
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): After passing the stimulus, Democrats should have continued to propose middle-class oriented programs and built on the partial success of the stimulus. But unfortunately, Democrats blew the opportunity the American people gave them. We took their mandate and put all of our focus on the wrong problem — health care reform. Now the plight of uninsured Americans and the hardships caused by unfair insurance company practices certainly needed to be addressed, but it was not the change we were hired to make. Americans were crying out for the end to the recession, for better wages and more jobs, not changes in health care.
This makes sense, considering 85% of all Americans got their health care from either the government, Medicare, Medicaid, or their employer. And if health care costs were going up, it really did not affect them. The Affordable Care Act was aimed at the 36 million Americans who were not covered. It has been reported that only a third of the uninsured are even registered to vote. In 2010 only about 40% of those registered voting. So even if the uninsured kept with the rate, which they likely did not, we would still only be talking about only 5% of the electorate.
To aim a huge change in mandate at such a small percentage of the electorate made no political sense. So when Democrats focused on health care, the average middle-class person thought the Democrats are not paying enough attention to me. Again, our health care system was riddled with unfairness and inefficiency. It was a problem desperately in need of fixing. The changes that were made are and will continue to be positive changes, but we would have been better able to address it if Democrats had first proposed and passed bold programs aimed at a broader swath of the middle class.
Had we started more broadly, the middle class would have been more receptive to the idea that President Obama wanted to help them. The initial faith they placed in him would have been rewarded. They would have held a more pro-government view and would have given him the permission structure to build a more pro-government coalition. Then Democrats would have been in a better position to tackle our nation’s healthcare crisis.
Healthcare, it wasn’t at the top of the agenda for middle class people …
“We should have done it, we just should not have done it first”. People were hurting and said, what about me, I am losing my job. It’s not health care that is bothering me.”
EXIT QUESTION: So why is Sen. Charles Schumer making these comments about Obamacare? Maybe because Schumer does not want to be the next on the list of 29 Democrat Senators who are no longer in the US Senate who voted for Obamacare.
Streets of Fire … As Barack Obama Called For Calm Following the Grand Jury Decision, Chaos, Fires, Gunshots & Riots Broke Out in Ferguson, MO (VIDEO)
THEY DIDN’T LISTEN …
As President Barack Obama spoke to America following the grand jury decision in Ferguson, Missouri not to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Michael Brown, he called for calm. The problem, they didn’t listen. Last night the mid-west looked more like the Middle East as protesters burned, looted and completely destroyed numerous businesses and damaged property in their wake. The imagery during Barack Obama’s speech was breathtaking. His calls for calm, for peace, to not vandalize property was juxtaposed to riots, looting, fires and complete chaos.
“We are a nation built on the rule of law, so we need to accept that this decision was the grand jury’s to make,” he said, saying that while he understands some Americans will be “deeply disappointed—even angered,” police and communities need to move closer together, and “that won’t be done by throwing bottles. That won’t be done by smashing car windows. That won’t be done by using this as an excuse to vandalize property. It certainly won’t be done by hurting anybody.”
Look what happened when law enforcement took a kinder, gentler approach to the protesters.
VIDEO – CNN – Riots, bullets, tear gas in Ferguson, Mo
VIDEO – Riots, looting, police response
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel Shown the Door … Barack Obama Can Tolerate A Lot, Cluelessness, Incompetence & Laziness But Not Criticism
THAT WAS QUICK …
Barack Obama’s Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is out. Some say he resigned, others say it was a firing. In any event, Hagel has stepped down as Defense Secretary. Talk about a revolving door. On January 7, 2013, President Barack Obama nominated Hagel to serve as Secretary of Defense. On February 12, 2013, the Senate Armed Services Committee approved Hagel’s nomination. Now on 11/23/14, Hagel has resigned. The former Senator from Nebraska had many missteps and seemed like he was over his head from the outset. But how should that be any different from others in Obama’s inner circle, including Obama himself? However, it was Hagel’s criticism of Obama policy that ultimately led to his demise. Hagel’s comment that ISIS is “like beyond anything we have ever seen” might have been the truth, but as we have seen on so many other occasions with the Obama presidency, there is no place for the truth with this administration.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s exit from the Obama administration came after weeks of discussion with President Obama over what role he would play in shaping defense policy over the last two years of his term.
The pair ultimately came to the conclusion that another leader would be better equipped to lead the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), senior administration and Defense officials said.
While aides described the departure as a mutual decision based on shifting priorities at the Department of Defense, there are signs that tensions between Hagel and the White House contributed to the personnel change.
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Hagel’s problems were not institutional, he was over his head from the beginning. Anybody who watched his hearings knew that, he knew that. He was sort of a non-presence for the first year or so. The irony is that he got tossed in the end and thrown under the bus because he actually sort of spoke up, spoke out and spoke the truth on the fact that the Syrian policy was entirely incoherent. He went against the White House and Susan Rice and the NSC, who were trying to manage his department and manage the Department of Defense over his head. And when he said the truth, he criticized the administration. Obama can tolerate a lot — cluelessness, incompetence, laziness — but not criticism; he had to go.
SNL’s Barack Obama Pushes The Schoolhouse Rock Immigraton Bill Down The Capitol Steps … Making His Own Executive Order
What makes good humor is it has to contain some truth. What makes great humor is it is 100% the truth …
Last night SNL opened the show with a skit that was fantastically funny and pathetically sad all at the same time. For all those who are old enough to remember the School House Rocks, ‘I’m Just a Bill,’ completely understood the biting sarcasm and mockery of the political system. Instead of the way we learned it as kids and the way the US Constitution provides for … “I’m just a bill, yes I’m only a bill, and I’m sitting here on Capitol Hill,” Barack Obama decided to change law on his own. The result, SNL’s I’m an executive order.
As the immigration bill sings to the young boy explaining how a law is made, Obama tosses the bill down the Capitol Hill steps in lieu of his executive order, “I’m an executive order and I pretty much just happen”.
Boy: [After Obama pushes the bill down the Capitol Hill steps] President Obama, what’s the big idea, that bill was just trying to become a law.
Obama: I realize that. But you know son there is an even easier way to get things done around here. It’s called an executive order.
Executive Order: “I’m an executive order and I pretty much just happen”. And that’s it.
Boy: Wait a second, don’t you have to go through Congress at some point?
Executive Order: Awe, that’s adorable. You still think that’s how government works. Ha, ha, ha.
Immigration Bill: [After climbing back up the steps] Don’t listen to them son. Look at the midterm elections, people clearly don’t want this, ahh [Obama pushes the bill down the steps again].
Boy: Mr President, is this Constitutional?
Obama: Of course, Presidents issue executive orders all the time.
Executive Order: That’s right. I could do lots of things. I’ll create national park or a new holiday.
Obama: Or grant legal status to 5 million undocumented immigrants.
Executive Order: Wait, what!!!
Obama: Yup, that’s what you are going to do.
Executive Order: Om my God, I didn’t have time to read myself. Whoa!!! OK, go big or go home, huh?
Finally, the first biting political spoof from Saturday Night Live in a while: the Bill from Schoolhouse Rock explains to a student how he becomes a law, only to be violently beat up by Barack Obama and his new best friend, “Executive Order.”
Even then, the poor Executive Order still thinks he’s used for simple things, like declaring holidays and creating national parks, until Obama informs him that he’s going to be used to grant amnesty to 5 million undocumented immigrants. His reaction: “Whoa.”
Barack Obama Says, “American People Will Want that “New Car Smell” with “Not Much Mileage” For the 2016 Presidential Campaign
In an ABC News interview with George Stephanopoulos, President Barack Obama made some rather peculiar comments with regards to Hillary Clinton. When asked about Hillary Clinton and her possible run for president in 2016, Obama said the following, “… she and a number of other possible Democrat candidates would be terrific presidents.” Obama then went on to say, “if she decides to run, I think she will be a formidable candidate. I think she will make a great president”. He did this while making a face, at the 1:04 mark. Then came the money line of the interview …
“I think the American people, you know, they’re going to want that new car smell. You know, they want to drive something off the lot that — that doesn’t have as much mileage as me.”
I believe that Obama made a back-handed slap at Hillary Clinton referencing a “new car smell” and one with “not much mileage”. However, mainly I think he was referring to himself as being so unpopular by 2016 rolls around that no one will probably want him stumping for them, much like in 2014. If you think Obama was toxic in 2014, just wait until 2016. What was a direct slap to Hillary was when he was specifically asked about her, Obama said that a number of other possible Democrat candidates would be terrific presidents. Hardly a ringing endorsement.
“I think the American people, you know, they’re going to want that new car smell,” Obama said in an interview that aired Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.” “You know, they want to drive something off the lot that — that doesn’t have as much mileage as me.”
“When you’ve been president for six years, you know, you’ve got some dings,” Obama said. “You know, they’re probably not going to be looking at me to campaign too much.”
“I think at the end of two years if — if they want me to do some selective things, I’ll be happy to do them, but I suspect that folks will be ready to see me go off to the next thing.”
“I am very interested in making sure that I’ve got a Democratic successor,” Obama said. “So I’m going to do everything I can, obviously, to make sure that whoever the nominee is, is successful.”
She hasn’t announced so I don’t want to jump the gun,” Obama said about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whom he said he speaks with regularly. “If she decides to run, I think she will be a formidable candidate and I think she’d be a great president.”
“She’s not going to agree with me on everything,” the President continued. “And, you know, one of the benefits of running for president is you can stake out your own positions — and have a clean slate, a fresh start.”
UPDATE I: Obama Is Damaging Hillary’s Chances.
Which leads perfectly into the WSJ article of how Barack Obama is damaging and will damage Hillary Clinton’s presidential nominee chances. Hillary Clinton is linked directly to the Obama presidency and is hardly considered one with a “new car smell”. Just like in 2014, Obama may not have been on the ballot, but his policies were. The same will hold true in 2016. Turnabout is fair play. Obama ran against GWB, Democrats are going to have to distance themselves from Obama.
President Obama ’s high-risk immigration gamble may have severe consequences for Washington, the country and the Democratic Party, most of all Hillary Clinton .
Mrs. Clinton’s putative bid for the Democratic presidential nomination is already running into trouble. The national exit poll from the recently completed midterm elections showed her with less than a majority of voters (43%) saying she would make a good president. When pitted against an unnamed Republican candidate, Mrs. Clinton lost 40% to 34%.
Those grim numbers followed on a September WSJ/NBC poll showing a plunge in Mrs. Clinton’s favorability rating, to 43%, from 59% in 2009.
Posted November 24, 2014 by Scared Monkeys
2014 Elections, 2016 Elections, Barack Obama, Campaigner in Chief, Community Agitator, Democrats, Divider in Chief, Epic Fail, Hillary Clinton, Liberals, Misleader, Obamanation, Presidential Contenders, Progressives, The Lying King, WTF, You Tube - VIDEO | 3 comments
IRSGATE: IRS Inspector General Tells Congress They Have Found as Many as 30,000 of Lois Lerner Supposedly Irretrievable, Missing Emails
Hey Lois Lerner … YOU GOT MAIL!!!
IRS investigators have informed Congress that they have located as many as 30,000 of former IRS official Lois Lerner’s emails. The emails that were said have been permanently lost after a convenient hard drive crash of her computer. Remember when John Koskinen, the new IRS commissioner, testified under oath to Congress on June 20th the emails had been irretrievably lost. Hmm, I guess not so much, eh? Where were those found? The inspector general discovered the potential emails among 744 disaster recovery tapes that backup IRS systems. Just where everyone said they would be. However, why had the IRS not found her emails sooner? Judicial Watch announced earlier this month that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) admitted to the court that it failed to search any of the IRS standard computer systems for the “missing” emails of Lois Lerner and other IRS officials.
IT WOULD APPEAR THAT THIS SCANDAL IS NOT OVER, ESPECIALLY WITH THE GOP TAKING CONTROL OF THE SENATE NEXT YEAR.
The IRS’s inspector general has told Congress that it may have discovered as many as 30,000 of the lost Lois G. Lerner emails, despite the IRS’s repeated insistence both in testimony to both Capitol Hill and federal courts that they were beyond recovery, congressional committees said Friday.
Investigators are now trying to figure out if they can to the data in a readable format — a process that could take weeks, according to a congressional aide.
The inspector general discovered the potential emails among 744 disaster recovery tapes that backup IRS systems, and found up to 30,000 Lerner emails from 2009 to 2011, which covers the period of emails she reported lost in a computer hard drive crash.
The revelation raised a host of questions about the IRS’s claims that the emails had been irretrievably lost — assertions the agency and its new chief, John Koskinen, had made both while testifying under oath to Congress and in court papers defending against lawsuits from several of the conservative groups who had been denied approval for nonprofit status.
The missing emails extend from 2009 to 2011, a period when Lerner headed the IRS’s exempt-organizations division.
The emails were lost when Lerner’s computer crashed, IRS officials said earlier this year.
Now what are the odds that there will be any incriminating emails delivered to Congress. Not only does the IRS need to produce Lerner’s emails, they also need to produce all of the emails of all the other individuals who Lois Lerner emailed. We all know you can delete the received and sent accounts of emails. It is the email chain that becomes the smoking gun of who the emails were sent to and forwarded to from third parties.
I thought the United States did not pay ransoms to terrorists?
It turns out that the Obama administration did pay money to terrorists in an attempt to get the release of Army deserter Bowe Bergdahl. UNREAL. The Department of Defense did pay a ransom for the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl but the transaction’s Afghan middle man ran off with the cash. This goes against previous Pentagon statements in 2009 where they denied doing any such thing. LIARS!!! The ransom payment also goes against President Obama’s strategy finical strategy in pressuring foreign governments, corporations and families of captives not to pay ransom. What are the odds we will hear Obama say, he just learned about this scandal too? But when that failed, Obama did the next worse thing … released 5 GITMO terrorists for a deserter.
The Department of Defense attempted to pay a ransom for the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl but the transaction’s Afghan intermediary ran off with the cash, according to a member of the House Armed Services Committee.
The claims directly contradict statements from the Pentagon, which has vehemently denied that it paid cash to a Taliban splinter group that captured Bergdahl in 2009. The administration in May released five-value Guantanamo Bay detainees in exchange for Bergdahl’s release.
Remember following the release of Bowe Bergdahl, FOX News reported that the Obama administration may have given the Taliban and Haqqani terrorists money as well as the five top Taliban prisoners? Watch the VIDEO below of the Catherine Herridge interview with Greta Van Susteran and On the Record.
The Pentagon is under fire for making a ransom payment to an Afghan earlier this year as part of a failed bid to win the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, according to U.S. officials.
Sgt. Bergdahl was released in May after nearly five years in captivity as part of a controversial exchange for five terrorists held at the U.S. military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The ransom payment was first disclosed by Rep. Duncan Hunter in a Nov. 5 letter to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. Mr. Hunter stated in the letter that Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) made the payment covertly as part of a release deal. But the money was stolen by the Afghan intermediary claiming to represent the Haqqani terrorist network.
“Given the significance of this matter, as well as the fact that Pentagon officials have denied that a payment was even considered — and you also said you were unaware of any such attempt — I ask you to immediately inquire with JSOC to determine the specific order of events,” said Mr. Hunter, California Republican and member of the House Armed Services Committee.
Mr. Hunter also asked Mr. Hagel whether ransom payments are being considered for other captives.
Disclosure of the ransom payment undermines a key financial element of President Obama’s strategy to counter the Islamic State — pressuring foreign governments, corporations and families of captives not to pay ransom. In a speech in September, David S. Cohen, Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said the Islamic State made $20 million this year in ransoming hostages.