Video: Fox's William La Jeunesse getting very close to blowing lid off of Fast and Furious

This news report seems to portend some very significant developments in the Fast and Furious case. Note how Fox's William La Jeunesse brings Manuel Celis-Acosta and Uriel Patino into the fold. Patino purchased guns as a straw buyer and handed them off to Acosta, the ringleader in the Fast and Furious investigation. Despite that, the ATF let Acosta go after finding weapons that Patino purchased in Acosta's car. That was in late March of 2010.

Then, in May of that year, Acosta was stopped again by the ATF; loaded magazines were found in Acosta's vehicle but he was still let go, ostensibly to collect information on two drug lords in Mexico. Ridiculously, those two drug lords were actually FBI informants. La Jeunesse makes an excellent point when he says the "big fish argument" from the ATF invalid. Throughout this scandal, ATF has maintained that it allowed straw purchasers to buy weapons in the hopes that such purchases would lead to bigger fish. However, as La Jeunesse points out, Acosta WAS the big fish and the ATF let him go twice.

The key part of this video, however, comes at the 2:25 mark, when La Jeunesse reveals that all of this information has come from an "insider" and not as a result of the Justice Department's compliance with congressional subpoenas.

My guess is that Eric Holder is in a heap of trouble as this continues to unravel. We may be reaching the point when the levee breaks.

Video: The Battle of Athens (Not Greece)

I thought about setting this video up by using a metaphor to explain why it's relevant. Then I thought, "If anyone needs a metaphor to understand the significance of this clip, they're either out to lunch or a 24-hour, jock-sniffing, ESPN addict and wouldn't understand the metaphor anyway."

Just watch.



h/t Barrackaid #34

Guest Writer: David Conn on Mitt Romney (Part 1)

David Conn was a central figure in exposing Jim Jones in the 1970's. In fact, he is the one primarily responsible for causing Jones to panic and ultimately uproot his flock from Northern California and then moving it to Guyana, South America. He studied Jones for years and is considered an expert on cult mentalities.

A few months ago, I received a column from him that focused on Mitt Romney and I have posted it below. He recently wrote a follow-up article, which I will be posting tomorrow. Here is a link to his website. Interestingly, another man - Pastor O'Neal Dozier - arrived at similar conclusions and made news earlier this month when he called on Romney to denounce his "racist" religion.

Anyway, here is Conn's first of two articles.

What You Must Understand about Mitt Romney
David Conn
October, 2011

If Mitt Romney is nominated, Obama will win a second term. The radical Democrat attack machine will stop at nothing to expose all the weirdness of Romney's Mormonism, things about which the public, including Catholics and evangelicals, are mostly unaware.

Romney will be forced to lie about his own cultic faith. And the more he lies, the more the leftist attack dogs will be able to expose both him and Mormonism. It will be Mormonism's first world wide exposure -- and with it will come a full exposure of Romney's major intellectual weakness: the inability to see the obvious.

Obama's forces, though, will not directly attack Romney. They will do it through radical instruments and ties to left wing organizations that are utterly without scruples. Through them, Obama and his mob, with more than a billion dollars in their coffers, will pull out every stop in displaying the inanities of the Mormon cult.

It will not be pleasant. Obama's political army, though, will appear completely innocent. They will even falsely display a criticism of organizations who disparage Romney's religion. They will exude sensitivity.

Romney will be in a strange spot, for he cannot deny that he holds all those strange Mormon beliefs. He can only say that he is a Mormon in good standing. And that will launch him into an arena where Obama and his regime will take great and secret delight. For they will surreptitiously reveal every bizarre belief held by Romney and the Mormon cult:

... the soul -- the mind of man -- the immortal spirit. Where did it come from?  All learned men and doctors of divinity say that God created it in the beginning; but it is not so; the very idea lessens man in my estimation.... The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal with God.
(from Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 352-253)

They also believe that Christ was the spirit brother of the Devil, and celebrated his own marriage to "both the Marys and Martha, whereby he could see his seed before he was crucified" (see Pearl of Great Price, Moses 4:1-4 Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 282, and the Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pp. 259-260).

Their Book of Moses states that the very first murderer, Cain, was the father of the Negro race: "his black skin was due to a curse by God." That is why, for a hundred years or more, Blacks were paid little attention. Mormons believed that the Blacks' 'preexistent souls' "were less than valiant in the 'war in heaven' between Christ and Satan," and that they were being "punished by being assigned to black bodies during their mortality."

And the American Indians were thought to be "descendents of the Book of Mormon's wicked Lamanites, ... allegedly cursed by the Mormon deity with dark skins as a punishment for the misdeeds of their forefathers."   (See Walter Martin's Kingdom of the Cults, p.218) It was Dr. Martin's observation that "Mormonism, then, is clearly a religion with a shameful history of white supremacist doctrines and practices."

It is a fact that Obama’s radical cadre has taken careful note of the crazy cult beliefs of the Mormons. It is also aware that the American public has almost no knowledge of the anomalous Mormon precepts and the weird Mormon history. And the Obama team will utilize every opportunity to inform the public of the stunning details throughout the history of Mormonism. Only then will the media happily relay what the Obama team has “uncovered.” It will be the Mormon’s first major exposure. And that is how Obama would gain his second term.

Barack Obama's intellectual cowardice is vast and remains yet unfathomed, due to an unrestrained mendacity. But Romney's cultic propensities are miniscule compared to Barrack Obama's radical Marxist-socialism coupled with his false Christianity and extravagant defense of Islam's radical global goals. Romney is confined to a comparatively less harmful cult mentality and thus would do far less harm than Obama. But what does it matter? Obama will see to it that Romney is not elected! Obviously, then, it would be best if Romney is not the Republican candidate.

(David Conn is an expert on cult mentalities. He has a standing offer to debate the Mormon hierarchy at any time and place of their choosing. He co-authored THE CULT THAT DIED, Putnam's Sons of New York, and is the author of LEDNORF'S DILEMMA. His email is davcon137@aol.com and his web site is www.truthsleuth.net.)

Did Santorum take the 'Etch-a-Sketch' Gaffe too far?

Though Rick Santorum's point that there isn't much difference between Obama and Romney is well taken, coming from him, it may have turned a Romney campaign gaffe into a Santorum gaffe. It also didn't help the perception that Santorum is the angry candidate who resents the fact that his message isn't resonating the way he wants it to.

To Santorum's point, four years of Jimmy Carter moved this country so far to the right that we elected Reagan. Four years of Jimmy Carter on steroids (Obama) doesn't appear to have moved this country even right of center if Romney is the nominee. In that respect, Santorum has a point but his argument that Romney will be worse than Obama not only comes across as petulant but it gives the DNC a powerful campaign commercial if Romney is the Republican nominee (they have plenty already).

Personally, I'm highly skeptical that Romney has a chance of beating Obama. In fact, Santorum probably should have laid out the reasons why that is true before he decided to practically wish it. Secretly, Obama's team likely thinks a Romney nomination gives them the best chance to win. After all, he's securing the nomination not with ideas but with money; Obama will have more than him so what does that portend? There are four things I see that will significantly hurt Romney against Obama.

1. The caricature of him as the poster child for the 1%
2. Obamacare is neutralized by Romneycare
3. Mainstream media campaign to attack Mormonism
4. A de-energized base due to a liberal candidate (John McCain effect)

Nonetheless, it appears that Santorum took a golden gaffe from team Romney and drew the wrong kind of attention to himself by taking it a bit too far for Republican voters. In fact, at CPAC last month, Andrew Breitbart accused anyone who would not support the Republican nominee, regardless of who it eventually becomes, as being "on the other side." While that may have been a bit strong, it's sentiment that many conservative voters share (the CPAC crowd certainly seemed to agree).

Conversely, the anti-Romney sentiment from the right is quite strong. If it weren't, I'm not sure Santorum would have said this.

h/t Freedom's Lighthouse

The candidate who could benefit most from both the "Etch-a-Sketch" gaffe and Santorum's "Etch-a-Sketch" gaffe "gaffe," is Newt Gingrich, who has released a powerful ad slamming the Romney campaign over the former while distancing himself from the latter's comments by tweeting that Romney would most assuredly be better than Obama.

Here's Newt's ad:

1965 Audio: Paul Harvey's "If I were the Devil"

When I first saw this a week or two ago, I had no idea it was from 1965. Though I found the images juxtaposed with Paul Harvey's commentary compelling, they are far more so when you realize that these words were spoken more than forty-five years ago. It's impossible to dispute that as a nation, we are where Harvey warned us not to go and in every single example illustrated in this video, left wing ideology is responsible.



h/t Fox Nation

Video Disgrace: OWS Protesters 'Fish' for Cops with Doughnut

Beginning in the 1960's, miscreants like these learned that if they engaged police officers when news cameras were around, the perception of police brutality was easily created. Often, protesters would taunt police until those cameras arrived, which made the inevitable confrontation look more brutal. In reality, the punks often got what they deserved. However, like is almost always the case, retaliatory strikes are the only ones caught on camera (check out unnecessary roughness calls in football). It was a tactic championed by Bill Ayers' Weather Underground and it was effective.

Contrast that with this video, shot at Union Square in New York. A row of police officers is keeping OWS'rs at bay and one of the protesters has a doughnut tied to the end of a string, which is tied to the end of a stick. As the punk mockingly and repeatedly casted his doughnut toward the police, the crowd laughed and chanted in support.

In the 1960's, the student might put the doughnut away before television news cameras arrived and scream about police brutality as he was getting what he had coming to him. Today, thanks to YouTube, we can see the whole story and it reveals a disgraceful bunch made up of petulant children in adult bodies.



h/t The Blaze