WHITE HOUSE EMAIL STORY BECOMING RADIOACTIVE?

GovDelivery has been identified by the White House as the now infamous "third party" responsible for all of those inboxes receiving David Axelrod spam seeking to counter all of that "mis-information" about Obama-care. Aside from the implication that taxpayers are funding the White House publicity campaign for something they may not agree with, GovDelivery doesn't seem all that willing to accept blame so easily.

VERUM SERUM does it again by uncovering the details of this story. In a Q&A on GOVDELIVERY'S WEBSITE, the president of GD makes the following claim:

GovDelivery is never involved in fundraising or advocacy on behalf of non-profit or political organizations.

Wait a minute. The White House is claiming that Govdelivery is responsible for spamming citizens with advocacy. So who is lying? Well based on this administration's track record, do you really have to ask that question?

Nonetheless, VS continues following the trail. GovDelivery's president further explains GovDelivery's role in the mass mailing of its clients' information:

GovDelivery allows clients to upload existing contact lists into GovDelivery.

So does this mean that the White House would have necessarily had to have issued those email address to GovDelivery instead of GovDelivery harvesting them like the White House claimed last week after finding itself in a pickle?

Be sure to read Verum Serum's ENTIRE ANALYSIS. It points to a very radioactive pickle that the White House tried to give to GovDelivery to deal with. GovDelivery appears to have either not been brought into the loop or is refusing to play ball. Popcorn a must at the next White House press briefing with Robert Gibbs when Major Garrett asks Gibbs to explain.

Just because it's fun to watch, here's the exchange between Gibbs and Garrett that opened this can of worms back on August 13th:

HONDURAS: ZELAYA FACING TREASON IF HE RETURNS

Except for a brief stunt where he walked across the boder to stick out his tongue and run back to Nicaragua, ousted Honduran president Manuel Zelaya hasn't been to Honduras since he was removed on June 28th. It is not for lack of crying or trying.

XINHUA is reporting that the Supreme Court of Honduras is playing hard ball with Zelaya:

Honduran Supreme Court warned in Tegucigalpa on Saturday that if ousted President Manuel Zelaya returns home, he'll face trial on charges of treason and abuse of power.

In a statement, the Honduran top court said Zelaya must abide by the existing Honduran law and accept the court's verdict. Rulings to pardon the ousted president and his followers should be made according to law.

Call me old fashioned but I find it quite refreshing that there are countries in existence today that are willing to so passionately defend their Constitution.

THE HILL reported back on July 29th that Zelaya allegedly sent a letter to Barack Obama urging him to revoke the visas of officials in the new Micheletti-led government that deposed Zelaya.

Shockingly, the U.S. State Dept under Obama obliged according to The Hill:

State Department spokesman Ian Kelly confirmed at Tuesday's news briefing that four diplomatic visas had been revoked by the U.S. Kelly did not name names, but the deputy foreign minister of Honduras's de facto government confirmed that one of the visas belonged to Judge Jose Tomas Arita Valle, the chairman of the 16-member supreme court who signed the ruling ordering the detention of Zelaya.

So how does the Supreme Court of Honduras respond less than one month later?

Zelaya is told he will face charges of treason if he returns. Every time Zelaya tries something cute, the sitting Honduran government seems to smack him down twice as hard. Again, Honduras is shocking the world and Zelaya is looking increasingly incompetent when it comes to leveraging all of the support he had worldwide.

MORE ON ZELAYA petitioning Obama successfully for revocation of Honduran officials' visas.

RASMUSSEN: OBAMA REACHES NEW LOW

While the percentage of people who strongly DISAPPROVE of Obama's performance has not reached a new high, that high of 41% has been matched today. The two new lows are his Presidential Approval Index, which has eclipsed his previous low of -12. Today it is -14. The other new low reached today is in the percentage of people who strongly APPROVE of Obama's performance. Prior to today, it never went below 29%. He is now at 27%

Known as the "Passion Index", Obama now shows 41% of Americans strongly DISAPPROVE while only 27% strongly APPROVE.

People are waking up slowly but they're waking up. RASMUSSEN has more.

WHITE HOUSE OPENLY ADMITTING BAD THINGS

It appears that the Obama Administration is weaving quite the tangled web as evidenced by the fallout from the Snitch Brigade email address. Initially, it had a dilemma it couldn't get out of after asking citizens to send them an email at flag@whitehouse.gov, which has since been rendered invalid. Now, it has a completely new set of problems that have been set off by their decision to blame a third party for harvesting all of those private email addresses.

The problem was this. If the WH said it wasn't keeping the correspondence or emails it was getting, it was in violation of one law that says they must keep all correspondence. If they said they were keeping the correspondence, they were violating 1st Amendment rights of citizens.

Their decision? Admit to keeping the email addresses but blame a third party for providing them. That third party is GovDelivery.

Enter the new set of problems as reported by FOX NEWS:

The company, Govdelivery, describes itself as the world's leading provider of government-to-citizen communication solutions and says its e-mail service provides a fully-automated on-demand public communication system.

It is still unknown how much taxpayer money the White House provides to Govdelivery for its services.

Wait. Did they say taxpayer money?

So Govdelivery, which I fund, was being directed by the White House to lobby the American public for Obama-care? Over half of the people in this country who don't support government-run health care are subsidizing a propaganda campaign designed to push government-run health care?

I'm sure that's legal.