Underground Stories 04-24-14

Congress Initiates President Obama’s Impeachment

While many have speculated over the potential of impeaching Pres. Barack Obama, several members of Congress have finally filed.
A resolution written by Rep. Tom Rice (R-SC) claims Obama should be impeached for his defiance against the Constitution. The congressman officially stated the purpose of initiating the impeachment process was to “bring a civil action for declaratory or injunctive relief to challenge certain policies and actions taken by the executive branch.”
The most recent and notable Constitutional defiance included a range of offenses regarding the Affordable Care Act. The president has changed the language of the law as well as, processes of implementation without the consent of Congress.
RELATED: Will Obama Force Congress To Let Him Run For Illegal 3rd Term?
Rice wrote, “President Obama has adopted a practice of picking and choosing which laws he wants to enforce. In most cases, his laws of choice conveniently coincide with his Administration’s political agenda. Our Founding Fathers created the Executive Branch to implement and enforce the laws written by Congress and vested this power in the President.  However, President Obama has chosen to ignore some of the laws written by Congress and implemented by preceding Presidents.”
So far, the impeachment proceedings have garnered support from 29 members of Congress.
Here is a list of those supporting Pres. Obama’s impeachment: Bachmann (MN), Bridenstine (OK), Chaffetz (UT), J. Duncan (SC), DeSantis (FL), Franks (AZ), Gowdy (SC), Harris (MD), Lamborn (CO), LaMalfa (CA), Marino (PA), McClintock (CA), Meadows (NC), Nunnelee (MS), Pittenger (NC), Posey (FL), Tom Price (GA), Ribble (WI), Salmon (AZ), Sanford (SC), Schweikert (AZ), Stewart (UT), Stockman (TX), Walberg (MI), Weber (TX), Wenstrup (OH), Williams (TX), Joe Wilson (SC), and Yoho (FL).

RAF Jet Chases Russian Planes Away From UK

Two planes are turned back as they approach Scotland, as the Royal Navy "keeps an eye" on a Russian warship's movements.

Two Russian bombers which flew close to UK airspace have been chased away by an RAF jet fighter.

The aircraft, believed to be Tupolev 95s, were spotted off the coast of northeast Scotland.
They were turned away from Britain when an RAF Typhoon was scrambled from Leuchars airbase, near Dundee.
Crews stationed there are on standby to intercept unidentified aircraft at a moment's notice.
The incident comes amid heightened international tensions over the situation in Ukraine, following the annexation of Crimea by Russia last month.

Kenney slams millionaire anti-pipeline advocate

OTTAWA — Employment Minister and Calgary MP Jason Kenney says a billionaire Democratic Party donor who opposes Keystone XL and oilsands development can't simply fly a private jet into Canada to influence politicians.
This is not the "Wild West," Kenney said about Tom Steyer's recent trip to Alberta, adding that Steyer would need to register as a lobbyist.
There is no evidence that Steyer paid Canadian environmental groups or tried to lobby Canadian politicians.
However, Kenney said the US activist is full of "misinformed sentiment" and has no clue what's going in Alberta's oilsands.
Steyer is running public campaigns to scuttle the Keystone pipeline — despite making part of his fortune from the fossil fuel industry — and has American pundits suggesting that he is winning his fight.
Kenney's comments on Tuesday came a few days after the approval process for the pipeline was delayed indefinitely. Critics of White House say the dithering was to placate the likes of Speyer and other donors with deep pockets.
Steyer and his public action committee have been running anti-Keystone ads on TV and online claiming the pipeline will transport oil from Canada through "America's heartland" only to enrich foreign investors such as China.
Keystone is "a sucker's deal for America," the ad campaign claims.
Steyer said his trip last week to Alberta was to witness to the "David-and-Goliath" battle between aboriginals and the oil industry.
"I wanted to get as sense of what they were standing up for, and what was happening to the land," Steyer said.
Kenney noted the pipeline project received a positive environmental review from the U.S. State Department and that the project would create thousands of jobs.

Iran gets more cash thanks to U.S. negotiations


CHARLOTTE, NC, April 22, 2014 – Sometimes you have to wonder how Barack Obama and John Kerry arrive at their political strategies in the Middle East. Are they using a Ouija Board? Probably not. A Ouija Board would have more sense.
According to a report by Adam Kredo of the Washington Free Beacon, the U.S. has released another billion dollars to Iran as part of the nuclear agreement that was negotiated between Iran and world powers last year. That brings the current total of frozen assets that have now melted back into Iran’s economy to $2.55 billion since Obama’s Who Wants to be a Billionaire program combined with his Let’s Make a Deal foreign policy began in February.
Not to worry, Iran still has several more billion coming.
Just to refresh your memory, the money is contingent upon Iran stopping some of its nuclear weapons program as well as cutting back on its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium. It is, in broad general terms, the same sort of arrangement the United States has with Syria over the use of chemical weapons in their on-going civil war. You may recall that pesky “red line” thing that got in our president’s way a while back, when he and Mr. Kerry negotiated with Russia to get Syria to stop using those nasty weapons.
Different country. Different situation. Same philosophy.
In the process, Iran tells us they are playing by the rules of the agreement, (wink-wink, nudge-nudge) and Israel sits in the line of fire because Obama believes Benjamin Netanyahu is the real culprit when it comes to Middle East instability.
Said Rep. Peter Roskam (R., Ill) “It’s an outrage that the administration continues to provide massive sanctions relief to Iran, even as the Iranian government maintains its brazen support for terrorism and continues to develop advanced missile and nuclear warhead technologies,”
Mr. Roskam has it all wrong. Iran is an honorable country. They have told us they are not developing nuclear weapons or funding terrorism. We believe them because they gave us their word.. Therefore it must be true.


Benghazi Attack Was The Result Of U.S. ‘Switching Sides In The War On Terror’

The Citizens Commission on Benghazi, a self-selected group of former top military officers, CIA insiders and think-tankers, declared Tuesday in Washington that a seven-month review of the deadly 2012 terrorist attack has determined that it could have been prevented – if the U.S. hadn’t been helping to arm al-Qaeda militias throughout Libya a year earlier.

The United States switched sides in the war on terror with what we did in Libya, knowingly facilitating the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures,’ Clare Lopez, a member of the commission and a former CIA officer, told MailOnline.
She blamed the Obama administration for failing to stop half of a $1 billion United Arab Emirates arms shipment from reaching al-Qaeda-linked militants.
‘Remember, these weapons that came into Benghazi were permitted to enter by our armed forces who were blockading the approaches from air and sea,’ Lopez claimed. ‘They were permitted to come in. … [They] knew these weapons were coming in, and that was allowed..
‘The intelligence community was part of that, the Department of State was part of that, and certainly that means that the top leadership of the United States, our national security leadership, and potentially Congress – if they were briefed on this – also knew about this.’
The weapons were intended for Gaddafi but allowed by the U.S. to flow to his Islamist opposition.
The Citizens Committee on Benghazi released its interim findings on April 22, 2014 in Washington. Pictured are (L-R) Clare Lopez, Admiral (Ret.) Chuck Kubic, Admiral (Ret.) James ‘Ace’ Lyons, former CIA officer Wayne Simmons and civil rights attorney John Clarke
On September 11, 2012 armed terror-linked militias attacked U.S. diplomatic outposts in Benghazi, Libya, killing four Americans and driving the United States out of that part of the country

BENGHAZI BOMBSHELL! Ex Military and CIA Committee: Obama and Hillary Did It

A citizen’s committee made up of former high military brass, CIA and intelligence agents and think tank members have finished their report on Benghazi.  Their conclusion is Obama’s policies made the Benghazi attack by Al Qaeda possible by switching sides in the war on terror.  The committee spent 7 months investigating the Benghazi attack and it’s causes.  Their conclusion was that Obama allowed weapons to enter Libya and into Al Qaeda’s hands.  Without those weapons, the attack in Benghazi would not be possible.
One former CIA agent, Clare Lopez was quoted as saying:

“The United States switched sides in the war on terror with what we did in Libya, knowingly facilitating the provision of weapons to known al-Qaeda militias and figures.”

She blamed the Obama administration for allowing $500 million dollars worth of weapons to enter the country and into Al Qaeda’s hands:

“Remember, these weapons that came into Benghazi were permitted to enter by our armed forces who were blockading the approaches from air and sea.  They were permitted to come in. … [They] knew these weapons were coming in, and that was allowed..”

“The intelligence community was part of that, the Department of State was part of that, and certainly that means that the top leadership of the United States, our national security leadership, and potentially Congress – if they were briefed on this – also knew about this.”

The weapons were supposed to be for Gaddafi, but were allowed to flow to the Islamists fighting him.

Here is an  excerpt from their report:

“The White House and senior Congressional members,’ the group wrote in an interim report released Tuesday, ‘deliberately and knowingly pursued a policy that provided material support to terrorist organizations in order to topple a ruler [Muammar Gaddafi] who had been working closely with the West actively to suppress al-Qaeda.”

Another commission member, Retired Rear Admiral Chuck Kubic, said those weapons are now in Syria as Al Qaeda is trying to expand it’s sphere of influence throughout the Middle East.

“Gaddafi wasn’t a good guy, but he was being marginalized.  “Gaddafi actually offered to abdicate’ shortly after the beginning of a 2011 rebellion.”

“But the U.S. ignored his calls for a truce.”

Kubic said that the effort at truce talks fell apart when the White House declined to let the Pentagon pursue it seriously.

“We had a leader who had won the Nobel Peace Prize, but who was unwilling to give peace a chance for 72 hours.”

Gaddafi only asked for two conditions in return for stepping down.  First, he wanted to be able to continue fighting against Al Qaeda and having the sanctions lifted against himself, his family and his supporters.  Very modest requests but ones that were rejected outright by Obama and his henchpersons.

The White House and the National Security staff have not commented on the report.

'Hacking the Constitution’: States Quietly Plan to Ditch Electoral College

So far, nearly a dozen states have quietly signed onto a plan to effectively ditch the Electoral College and instead, award the White House to the candidate that wins the popular vote.
The National Popular Vote agreement would take effect if states that represent 270 electoral votes all commit. New York has most recently joined the efforts, bringing the number of states to 10 plus the District of Columbia. Altogether, they represent 165 electoral votes.

Digital politics editor Chris Stirewalt from FoxNews.com said “Without the Electoral College, we would have had a whole different trajectory of presidents. If presidents are selected through the popular vote, he said that campaigns will focus on maximizing turnout in urban centers. He said the “plan is to subvert the will of the Constitution and the founders.”

“This is disempowering to rural America and empowering to urban America,” he said, explaining that it amounts to a “hack” of the Constitution by people who don’t believe in the Electoral College.

Since there is not enough support in Congress to change the Constitution and officially end the Electoral College, this plan would allow popular vote advocates to work around it.

Stirewalt pointed out that this plan is part of a larger trend on the part of “frustrated” liberals who haven’t been able to bring about the changes they want.

“They are simply taking them. They are simply doing it and if people dissent and if people complain and if the stodgy, old Constitution gets in the way, if the fussy old Whigs in the Electoral College complain about it, too bad. Because they’re gonna hack the code and they’re gonna find a way to get what they want,” he said.

This Means War: US To Target Putin’s Personal $40 Billion Stash

Editor’s Note: Consider for a moment that you are President Vladimir Putin. You’ve seen US and European sanctions seize the personal wealth of members of your parliament through various banking mechanisms as a result of their material support for the actions in Crimea. As the President of Russia, what do you do when those same sanctions now target your personal wealth and business interests? Do you sit idly by while $40 billion dollars are confiscated from your personal accounts? What course of action do you take next?
That is exactly the position that Vladimir Putin is now in, and according to the following report, National Security Adviser Susan Rice makes it clear that the United States is seriously considering this as an option.
The strategy may have worked out great when the United States seized the assets of deposed leaders in Egypt and Libya. It’s an entirely different matter when you target the President of a nuclear armed nation and one who has had no qualms about going head-to-head with the United States, not just in rhetoric but with his actions both economically and militarily.
Of course, as Zero Hedge notes, we’re sure the Obama administration “has considered all the intended and unintended consequences of such a move.”

While the White House has continually threatened further sanctions against Russia for non-de-escalation (even as it un-de-escalates itself), thespecifics of the additional sanctions have been sparse. German CEO warnings over blowback from economic sanctions… the “nonsense” of replacing Russian gas with US gas… the Russian warnings of “interdependence” and “boomerangs”… all reduce the West’s arsenal of financial sanctions. But, as The Times of London reports, perhaps the US has found a crucial pain point for Putin – a sanctions regime that would target Putin’s personal wealth, which includes a reported $40 billion stashed in Swiss bank accounts.
As The Hill reports,
The White House on Friday refused to comment on reports that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s personal wealth could be targeted if the West were to move ahead with additional sanctions over Ukraine.
“I’m not going to get into foreshadowing particular individuals or entities that the United States may target,” national security adviser Susan Rice told reporters at the White House. “But let me just say we’ve been clear that there are additional individuals, officials, close associates of senior leadership, oligarchs and those entities that they are associated with that remain very much potential targets of additional sanctions.”
The Times of London reported Friday that the U.S. was preparing a sanctions regime that would target Putin’s personal wealth, which includes a reported $40 billion stashed in Swiss bank accounts.

Putin’s actual holdings are a tightly held secret, and the extent of his holdings are difficult to estimate. But a threat of trying to freeze the Russian president’s personal assets could have played a role in a deal brokered Thursday by foreign ministers from the U.S., Ukraine, Russia and European Union.

Perhaps it is worth remembering Putin’s response from last week’s Q&A…

Putin was asked why the US can do whatever it wants and no one punishes them, while attempts are being made to punish Russia.

“The US is certainly one of the world’s leaders. At some point it seemed that it was the only leader and a uni-polar system was in place. Today it appears that is not the case. Everything in the world is interdependent and once you try to punish someone, in the end you will cut off your nose to spite your face,” he said.

Though we are sure Obama and his team have considered all the intended and unintended consequences of any such actions.
-
North American Pipelines.

Texas Attorney General Fires Back Against BLM

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is fighting back against the Bureau of Land Management, or the BLM. The BLM is claiming a stake over 90,000 acres of land currently held by Texas. This situation follows another state versus federal government related issue that involved the BLM in Nevada. Attorney General Abbott recently stated that he is "about ready to go to go to the Red River and raise a ‘Come and Take It’ flag to tell the feds to stay out of Texas.”

US troops arrive in Poland for drills amid rising tensions over Ukraine

The first wave of US troops has arrived in Poland to begin military drills “promoting peace and stability” across Eastern Europe. Tensions continue to mount in the region, as Ukraine teeters on the brink of a civil war.
A contingent of 150 American soldiers arrived in the Polish town of Swidwin on Thursday and will be shortly joined by another 450 troops. The soldiers will participate in military exercises in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia over the next three months, with a view to reassuring NATO allies in the region.
Defense Department spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby, who announced the drills Tuesday, said they sent a clear message to Moscow.
"If there's a message to Moscow, it is the same exact message that we take our obligations very, very seriously on the continent of Europe," Kirby told reporters. Washington has accused Russia of meddling in the affairs of neighboring Ukraine, which is currently embroiled in a crisis that shows no signs of de-escalation.
-