US Supreme Court Halts President Obama’s Climate Change Initiative 5-4

BIG BLOW TO BARACK OBAMA’S CLIMATE CHANGE INITIATIVE …

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations that is part of his global warming climate change initiative. 27 states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab” and that the regulations would greatly increase energy costs and put some of their industries out of business.  Appellate arguments are set to begin June 2, 2016. Thankfully, the SCOTUS put a hold on anything going forward as Powerline opines, “Obama’s EPA was betting that the slow legal process would mean that they’d have a lot of things in place, and many utilities would have complied with the EPA’s dictates, before the law was settled at the Supreme Court.”

Obama_sad

A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday abruptly halted President Obama’s controversial new power plant regulations, dealing a blow to the administration’s sweeping plan to address global warming.

In a 5-4 decision, the court halted enforcement of the plan until after legal challenges are resolved.

The surprising move is a victory for the coalition of 27 mostly Republican-led states and industry opponents that call the regulations “an unprecedented power grab.”

By temporarily freezing the rule the high court’s order signals that opponents have made a strong argument against the plan. A federal appeals court last month refused to put it on hold.

The court’s four liberal justices said they would have denied the request.

The plan aims to stave off the worst predicted impacts of climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions at existing power plants by about one-third by 2030.

“We disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Clean Power Plan while litigation proceeds,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said in a statement.Earnest said the administration’s plan is based on a strong legal and technical foundation, and gives the states time to develop cost-effective plans to reduce emissions. He also said the administration will continue to “take aggressive steps to make forward progress to reduce carbon emissions.”

State Department Announces that Nearly 2 Dozen Emails on Hillary Clinton’s Private Server are So Secret and “Too Damaging” to National Security to Release Under any Circumstances

HILLARY CLINTON SHOULD BE IN LEG IRONS, NOT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT … I GUESS WE KNOW WHO OBAMA’S FIRST PARDON WILL BE FOR. 

State Depart confirms that some of the emails on Hillary Clinton’s private server are so top secret and “too damaging” to national security that they will never see the light of day. This is a far cry from Hillary’s claims that there were no top secret emails on the server. What a shock, Hillary Clinton lied. According to Intelligence agencies, the information was top secret when it was sent and hit the Clinton’s servers, it was not upgraded after the fact (Watch Video below). However, the State Department continues to spread lies when it comes to this fact.

UNREAL, HILLARY CLINTON NEEDS TO BE INDICTED AND FOUND GUILTY. SHE KNOWS DAMN WELL WHAT SHE DID WAS WRONG AND KNEW SO AS SHE CONTINUED TO DO IT. WHICH BEGS THE QUESTION … WHAT DID SHE DESTROY AND WHAT WAS SHE HIDING?

Hillary Clinton_emails

Click HERE or on pic to watch VIDEO via FOX News

The intelligence community has deemed some of Hillary Clinton’s emails “too damaging” to national security to release under any circumstances, according to a U.S. government official close to the ongoing review. A second source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, backed up the finding.

The determination was first reported by Fox News, hours before the State Department formally announced Friday that seven email chains, found in 22 documents, will be withheld “in full” because they, in fact, contain “Top Secret” information.
The State Department, when first contacted by Fox News about withholding such emails Friday morning, did not dispute the reporting – but did not comment in detail. After a version of this report was first published, the Obama administration confirmed to the Associated Press that the seven email chains would be withheld. The department has since confirmed those details publicly.

The decision to withhold the documents in full, and not provide even a partial release with redactions, further undercuts claims by the State Department and the Clinton campaign that none of the intelligence in the emails was classified when it hit Clinton’s personal server.

hillary-clinton-jail

Just curious, can a President pardon some one before they have been found guilty of a crime?

The political hacks at the State Department Won’t Acknowledge That Clinton Emails Were Born Classified.

Fox News reporter Catherine Herridge asked whether the State Department disagreed with the intelligence community’s determination that Clinton’s email contained information that was highly-classified when it hit the server. The Clinton campaign has argued that the information was only classified retroactively.

“The ICIG’s letter from January 14, we’ve confirmed that it was the finding of the agencies who own the intelligence that they were top secret, even containing SAP information, when they hit the server,” Herridge said, using an acronym for Special-Access Programs, among the most closely-guarded secrets of government. “So this is a settled matter, this is not something that is still being pursued. Do you accept that?”

Kirby would not speak to the letter.

“I’m not going to speak specifically to that letter or the ICIG’s findings. You’d have to talk to them about that,” Kirby said.

Kirby insisted that the State Department would continue its review to determine if information in Clinton’s emails needed to be classified and redacted.

“It is the State Department’s responsibility to make the final adjudication on classification,” Kirby said.

Herridge said it was the responsibility of the intelligence agencies who own the information, not the State Department.

“No, that’s not correct,” Herridge said. “The agency that owns the information has final say over the classification, not the State Department, and these declarations relate to intelligence that was not State Department intelligence.”

Kirby conceded that the State Department had accepted the intelligence community’s decision to upgrade the information in this case.

Navy Goes PC … The End of ‘Midshipman’? Navy Secretary Calls for Removal of ‘Man’ from Titles

UNREAL, REMEMBER WHEN THE MILITARY WAS ABOUT DEFEATING THE ENEMY AND NOT POLITICAL CORRECTNESS?

So the US Navy is going PC because some all of a sudden calling woman who serve in the Navy, Midshipman, is just too mean and makes them feel uncomfortable. The term “midshipman” has been used since the 1600′s, long predating the academy, which opened in 1845. According to the story, women first enlisted in the Navy in 1917, weeks before the United States entered World War I ,  as yeomen. But suddenly the use of the name “Midshipman” is no longer good. Has this country lost its mind and focus on the task at hand? The fact that our military is wasting any resources to something so silly and ridiculous is just incredible. What else would we expect with Barack Obama as Commander in Chief? So what will the Navy come up with, Midship-people, or maybe Midship-folks?

WTF

What happens when you take the “man” out of “midshipman”?

Navy officials will consider this question as they turn to language in an effort to fully integrate women into all levels of the service, including the Naval Academy.

Ray Mabus, the secretary of the Navy, issued a memo to the chief of naval operations on Jan. 1 asking for an “update of position titles and descriptions to demonstrate through this language that women are included in these positions.”

He also wrote: “Please review the position titles throughout the Navy and ensure that they are gender-integrated … removing ‘man’ from their titles.”

So what should it be?

Midshiperson?

Shipmate?

Just mid?

Chief of Naval Operations John Richardson assigned the Navy’s master chief petty officer to establish a group that will, Navy officials said, “canvass the fleet, talk with sailors to hear their thoughts and provide recommendations on feedback.”

I have an idea, how about the US Navy focus on their job of protecting America and not get embarrassed by having their sailors taken hostage by Iranians on the seas and forced to put their hands over their heads and surrender their weapons. Hmm?

“13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” Out Today … Go Watch It … Movie Reignites ‘Stand-Gown’ Order Debate .. “Hillary Is a Liar!” (VIDEO)

MAKE IT A POINT TO SEE  THIS MOVIE THIS WEEK AND BRING YOUR HILLARY CLINTON LIBERAL SUPPORTING FRIENDS …

Michael Bay’s “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” is set to be released everywhere on Friday. This is a must see movie. As stated at the Politico, the new Benghazi movie reignites ‘stand-down’ order debate. Sorry, if I happen to believe the people who actually were there as opposed to the pathetic, rotten lying politicians trying to cover the collective asses of Barack Obama and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Our governments action with regards to the terror attacks in Benghazi will forever be a low-point in America history where those in power just left Americans to die and then blamed the radical Islamist terror attack on a tape. Shame on them and shame on the media for covering up the story.

The creators of a new Hollywood blockbuster about the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack are renewing the politically explosive allegation that commandos called to defend the U.S. compound were told to “stand down” — a claim Democrats say has no basis in fact.

With Michael Bay’s “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” set to premiere Thursday, the five surviving members of the six-man Benghazi security team have blitzed the airwaves to promote the film and renew their assertion that a top CIA officer delayed them from immediately answering State Department distress calls. Three even testified to the same before the House Select Committee on Benghazi last spring, several sources have confirmed to POLITICO.

“There is no sensationalism in that: We were told to ‘stand down,’” said former Special Forces Officer Kris Paronto, one of the CIA contractors who fought that night, in an interview with Politico. “Those words were used verbatim — 100 percent. … If the truth of it affects someone’s political career? Well, I’m sorry. It happens.”

Pat Smith, mother of State Department official Sean Smith who was murdered at the Benghazi Consulate on 9-11-3012, screamed out, “Hillary is a liar!” after watching the movie ’13 Hours.’

The Gateway Pundit:

Pat Smith joined Megyn Kelly tonight after attending the opening of ’13 Hours’ last night in Dallas, Texas.

She sobbed as she told Megyn about the movie.

I left as soon as Sean came on screen, or the person who portrayed him. I couldn’t handle it. HILLARY IS A LIAR! I know what she told me!

Smith was referring to Hillary’s bogus claims that a YouTube video was behind the deadly attacks.

Pat Smith later said she wants Hillary in jail.

Philadelphia Police Officer Jesse Hartnett Ambushed by 30 Year Old Edward Archer … Update: Suspect Confessed He Did it in the Name of Islam

THANK GOD, NOT ALLAH THAT POLICE OFFICER JESSEE HARTNETT IS ALIVE …

In what can only be described as a heinous and vile act of cowardice, Philadelphia police officer Jesse Hartnett is lucky to be alive after he was ambushed at shot numerous times at point-blank range. The suspect, 33 year old Edward Archer, fired 13 bullets at Officer Jesse Hartnett as the cop sat in his patrol car Thursday night. According to reports, the suspect confessed and stated he shot the officer in the name of Islam.

Philadelphia Police Commissioner Richard Ross  described the attack as an execution attempt.

I just have to tell you, when you look at the video–we have video that captured all of this–it’s one of the scariest things I’ve ever seen. This guy tried to execute the police officer. It’s amazing he’s alive,” Ross said at a press conference Friday morning.

Jesse Hartnett_ambused

Authorities say a Philadelphia police officer is recovering after he was shot several times during an ambush late Thursday night in West Philadelphia.

Philadelphia police commissioner Richard Ross says the officer, identified as 33-year-old Jesse Hartnett, was sitting in his patrol car around 11:30 p.m. at 60th and Spruce Streets when a gunman fired nearly a dozen shots through the driver’s side of the car.

“Shots fired! I’m shot! I’m bleeding heavily!” Officer Hartnett was heard yelling on police radio.

Police are calling it an “attempted assassination.”

UPDATE I: Suspect Used Stolen Police gun, and claims allegiance to ISIS.

The alleged radical Islamic gunman accused of shooting a Philadelphia cop used a stolen police gun in the attempted “assassination” and pledged allegiance to ISIS as he confessed to the harrowing ambush, officials said.

Suspected shooter Edward Archer fired 13 bullets at Officer Jesse Hartnett as the cop sat in his patrol car Thursday night, police said. The five-year force veteran was hit three times and suffered a broken arm and nerve damage — but was still able to chase after his assailant and fire at the fleeing gunman.

Archer, who was shot three times by the cop he targeted, was taken into custody shortly after the attack and confessed to the ambush, police said at a Friday press conference.

“He stated that he pledges his allegiance to Islamic State. He praises Allah, and that was the reason he was called to do this,” said Philadelphia Police Capt. James Clark.

Man Accused of Shooting Philly Cop Pledged Allegiance to ISIS

Communication between officer and dispatch after shooting

Judicial Watch Says The State Department has been Providing “Inaccurate and Incomplete” Responses to Requests for Emails & other Documents involving Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

HOW IS HILLARY CLINTON RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT AND NOT BEHIND BARS?

Judicial Watch states that the State Department has been providing “inaccurate and incomplete” responses to requests for emails and other documents involving former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Imagine that? An Obama government agency not providing a watch dog group accurate and complete responses to material that a court says they they are entitled to protect We the People. What a joke government has become. It is no longer about “of by and for the people” but instead about power grabs, maintaining power and covering their asses. It is pathetic to think that an individual who has been caught red handed doing something illegal and is being investigated by the FBI is actually running for the presidential nomination of a major political party and leading. How could America possible allow an individual so corrupt to be President?

hillary-clinton-jail

 The State Department has been providing “inaccurate and incomplete” responses to requests for emails and other documents involving former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a watchdog says in a new report released Thursday.

The 29-page IG report says the leadership of the State Department “has not played a meaningful role in overseeing or reviewing the quality” of the responses to requests for documents under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

As a result, requests from organizations such as The Associated Press, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and Judicial Watch have been mishandled in various ways, the IG said.

In one example, CREW asked for records in 2012 that would show the number of email accounts held by then-Secretary Clinton. While senior staffers at the department regularly corresponded with her on her private account and her chief of staff was made aware of the request, the State Department replied that there were “no records responsive” to the query.

The response to CREW came in May 2013 — three months after Clinton had left office.

At other times, the IG said, media organizations have put in nearly identical requests for documents, only to receive different sets of records in response.

In 2015, Clinton’s use of a private email server emerged as a flashpoint in the presidential race, with Republicans using it to attack her candidacy. A federal court judge ordered the State Department to release 55,000 pages of Clinton’s emails last May as a result of a lawsuit filed by Vice News.

“The Department had a preexisting process in place to handle the tens of thousands of requests it received annually, and that established process was followed by the Secretary and her staff throughout her tenure,” Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon told The Washington Post.

The IG said it has a separate report forthcoming on the “preservation requirements” that apply to former and current secretaries of State and the department’s “efforts to recover federal records from personal accounts.”

Daily Commentary – Monday, November 30, 2015 – Portland Oregon Police Officer Removed From Street After Twitter Post

Daily Commentary – Monday, November 30, 2015 Download

Americans Completely Distrust Their Government … 19% Say They Trust the Government Always or Most of the Time

DOES ANYONE WONDER WHY ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATES ARE DOING SO WELL?

According to a recent Pew Center poll,  just 19% say they can trust the government always or most of the time, among the lowest levels in the past half-century. I would actually question who those 19% are that think they can trust the government that much in this day and age. What is sad and has become a commonplace view by many Americans is that most Americans fell that elected officials put their own ambitions and power ahead of the country. Currently, Republicans are nearly three times as likely as Democrats (12%) to say they are angry with the government. Of course that is the case because Democrats follow Obama in lockstep and the Republican voters are upset that they have a bunch of gutless elected House and Senate members who made promises to get elected and once in power have done nothing but make excuses.

PEW Poll_112215

A year ahead of the presidential election, the American public is deeply cynical about government, politics and the nation’s elected leaders in a way that has become quite familiar.

Currently, just 19% say they can trust the government always or most of the time, among the lowest levels in the past half-century. Only 20% would describe government programs as being well-run. And elected officials are held in such low regard that 55% of the public says “ordinary Americans” would do a better job of solving national problems.

Currently, 22% say they are “angry” at the federal government; 57% are “frustrated,” and 18% say they are “basically content.” These sentiments have changed little over the past year, but two years ago – during the partial government shutdown – a record 30% expressed anger at government.

The share of Republicans and Republican leaners saying they are angry with the government is not as high as in October 2013 (32% now, 38% then). Nonetheless, Republicans are nearly three times as likely as Democrats (12%) to say they are angry with the government. And among politically engaged Republicans and Democrats – those who vote frequently and follow politics on a regular basis – the gap is nearly four-to-one (42% to 11%).

Among both Democrats and Republicans, large majorities say they can seldom, if ever, trust the federal government (89% of Republicans, 72% of Democrats). While trust in government among Republicans has varied widely depending on whether a Republican or Democrat is in the White House, Democrats’ views have shown far less change.

Remember America, this is your government and you elected them. Vote them out if you are so dissatisfied. Obviously, a Democrat or Republican is not going to vote for the other parties candidate, but you can toss the establishment candidates of both parties out on their collective ears in the primaries.

Secretary of State John Kerry Said What … There was a “Rationale” for the Assault on Satirical French weekly Charlie Hebdo, Unlike the Attack in Paris

HE SAID WHAT?!?

Did the United States Secretary of State John Kerry just make a justification for a terror attack that saw the death of innocent lives? He most certainly did. As reported at The Politico, Secretary of State John Kerry suggested on Tuesday that there was a “rationale” for the assault on satirical French weekly Charlie Hebdo, unlike the more recent attacks in Paris. WHAT!!! There was a rationale behind an Islamic terror attack of a media outlet that killed 12 innocent people? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? What kind of an ass-hat makes such a comment? The sad reality is we get to see a true glimpse into what the Obama administration really thinks about terrorism and why they have done little to nothing to stop ISIS. They actually think in some cases there is a “rationale” to terrorists killing people. UNREAL.

Jeb Bush to John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and the LEFT …There is no rationale for barbaric Islamic terrorism

Secretary of State John Kerry suggested on Tuesday that there was a “rationale” for the assault on satirical French weekly Charlie Hebdo, unlike the more recent attacks in Paris.

“There’s something different about what happened from Charlie Hebdo, and I think everybody would feel that,” Kerry said in Paris, according to a transcript of his remarks. “There was a sort of particularized focus and perhaps even a legitimacy in terms of — not a legitimacy, but a rationale that you could attach yourself to somehow and say, OK, they’re really angry because of this and that.”

“This Friday was absolutely indiscriminate. It wasn’t to aggrieve one particular sense of wrong. It was to terrorize people,” he continued.

The attack on Charlie Hebdo, which took place in January, killed 12 people and was perpetrated by radical Islamic militants with ties to al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen. An al Qaeda statement claiming responsibility for the murders said they were retribution for the magazine’s decision to run cartoons mocking the Prophet Mohammed, and to avenge the drone strike that killed Yemeni-American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.

Roosevelt Field Mall in Long Island, NY Ditches Santa’s Workshop for a Glacier

WHERE IS BUDDY FROM ELF WHEN YOU NEED HIM?

The war on Christmas has started early this year, just as early as stores rid themselves of Halloween displays. The Roosevelt Field Mall in Long Island, NY has ditched its traditional holiday village and put Ol’ Saint Nick inside a winter-themed “glacier” instead. And why did they do this? To avoid offending people, of course. Do these morons realize they are offending people by sanitizing Christmas? The mall charges anywhere from $24.99 to $59.99 for pictures with Santa who is sitting in front of an all-white background. Wait, isn’t that racist? Why is it black or inclusive of all colors? (sarcasm intended) There is no Christmas tree, no presents, no elves, no nothing!!! So now the secular commercialization of Christmas with Santa Claus is offensive. When will the absurdity end? Frankly, people should just do their Christmas shopping elsewhere is this mall is so offended by Christmas. Why is Santa even dressed in a red coat and hat? Just have the children take a picture next to some dude names Stan wearing khaki’s and a sweater.

Honestly, people need to boycott and not shop at places like this to show them the stupidity of their ways. In is simply ridiculous that less than 1% of people complaining that something is offensive would ruin in for so many children.

I guess people find the movie Elf offensive too

A Long Island mall swapped Santa’s sleigh for something resembling a spaceship and nixed the Christmas tree because it didn’t want to “offend” anyone, irate shoppers told The Post.

The Roosevelt Field Mall ditched its traditional holiday village and put Ol’ Saint Nick inside a winter-themed “glacier” instead. But some say the white and blue display looks more like something out of “Star Trek” than “Twas the Night Before Christmas.”

“Santa comes along with a decorated tree; he doesn’t come with a spaceship,” Maria Lovdahl fumed.

The Williston Park mother of two was shopping Thursday night when she spotted the apparently futuristic Santa photo kiosk.

“Me and my husband looked at each other and said, ‘What is that?’?” Lovdahl recalled. “They said it was because people were offended by the traditional Christmas display, that they had gotten comments in prior years.”

After a lifetime of shopping at Roosevelt Field and bringing her kids there, Lovdahl said, “I won’t be shopping there this year.”

Betty Borrero, 32, heard so much about the new display she came to see it for herself.

“I bring my child, I want to see the big tree in the background. This is blank,” she said, noting she’ll take her kid to Macy’s for this year’s holiday pictures.

In an update from Legal Insurrection, it appears that the Mall has somewhat relented on their stupid premise and they have put back the Christmas trees. Although, I can pretty much guarantee they call them festival trees.

Next Page →

Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

 
 
  • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
  • Red (comments)
  • Dugga (technical issues)
  • Dana (radio show comments)
  • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Close
E-mail It