June 7th, 2013
By Tony Maglio / The Wrap
Actress Shannon Richardson has been arrested and charged for allegedly sending ricin-tainted letters to President Barack Obama and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a law enforcement official confirmed to TheWrap.
Richardson is charged with mailing a threatening communication to the President of the United States, the U.S. Attorney's office said in a statement. According to the arrest affidavit, on May 20, 2013, Richardson is alleged to have actually mailed three letters containing the toxin ricin. The letters were sent to President Barack Obama and Mark Glaze in Washington, D.C., and Mayor Michael Bloomberg in New York City. Richardson was arrested today in Mt. Pleasant, Texas, and appeared before Judge Craven this afternoon in Texarkana, Texas, for an initial appearance.
FBI agents wearing hazardous material suits were seen going in and out of her house Wednesday in New Boston, about 150 miles northeast of Dallas near the Oklahoma and Arkansas borders, according to the Associated Press. Richardson, who is reportedly pregnant, originally called the FBI to implicate her husband, Nathaniel Richardson, in the crimes.
John Delk, Nathaniel Richardson's attorney, said his client had filed for divorce, which he believes explains her motive to frame her husband.
"There are a lot of factors I'm aware of that indicate (Nathaniel Richardson) was set up in this deal by her," Delk told the AP.
If inhaled, ricin can cause respiratory failure, among other symptoms. If swallowed, it can shut down the liver and other organs, resulting in death. The amount of ricin that can fit on the head of a pin is said to be enough to kill an adult, the AP reported.
If convicted, Richardson faces up to 10 years in federal prison.
June 7th, 2013
By Barry Secrest
In this clip from Shark Tank Media, former Congressman West asserts that the President's failure to act to defend American lives on US soil is "right up there" with regard to extreme Obama Regime negligence in Benghazi.
West makes a very valid comparison in speaking to Nixon's extraordinarily minor cover-up with regard to Watergate, as opposed to Obama's continual cover-up of the Benghazi event, both before, during, and after his re-election.
The Benghazi event marked the first time in over fifty years that a US Ambassador had been killed in the field of foreign service, despite massive advances in both intelligence and diplomatic communication technology in the modern day.
West asserts that "No one died in Watergate," and maintains that Obama's scenario is far, far, worse, but is he correct?
Let's take a look at the following Warren Roche YouTube video:
Roche pretty much establishes the same evidence we've been looking at on this site, in pointing to some rather extreme Obama Regime problems going forward, and even adds one that is mostly off the radar....
Obama's Possible Impeachment as Compared to Water-Gate:"Nixon Stepped Down Over Breaking and Entering"
June 7th, 2013
The IRS cannot find their receipts for a 2010 agency conference. This means they cannot meet the same standard to which they hold millions of Americans each year.
The missing receipts total some $4 million.
LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) - The IRS is catching fire as details of a controversial 2010 conference in Anaheim are exposed to public scrutiny. According to its own admission, the IRS held a conference that included gifts, the professional production of video spoofs, and upscale hotel rooms next door to Disneyland in California.
That conference cost taxpayers $49 million.
The audit revealed that IRS officials spent $50,000 on a video parody of Star Trek and another skit that included 15 IRS executives and managers dancing on a stage.
Another $44,000 went to pay two keynote speakers, one of whom created paintings on stage during his presentation. One of those paintings went missing. Some $64,000 was spent on gifts, without detail of what those gifts were.
And $133,000 was spent to pay two event planners to set up the entire conference.
During the course of the audit however, the IRS admitted that it couldn't find the receipts for about $4 million in expenses. The news was broke by CNN on Anderson Cooper's newscast. Correspondent Dana Bash told Cooper, "That is for real, Anderson. It is really hard to believe, but the IG report explicitly says, 'IRS management could not provide any documentation detailing how this money was spent.' At the time, three years ago, this is also hard to believe, keeping track of and reporting costs of conferences wasn't required at the IRS. Shoddy record-keeping wasn't limited to just these videos. The IG couldn't even verify the overall cost of the conference."
The IRS is under intense scrutiny following allegations that their agents and possibly leadership, deliberately targeted conservative groups for "extra scrutiny," or harassment.
The investigation has revealed a dysfunctional government agency, drunk with power, and egregious in its errors. Congressional investigators are working to learn who knew what and when with regards to the targeting of conservative groups, and now the loss of $4 million in receipts from an excessively lavish gathering.
It seems ironic that the IRS cannot meet the same standards for documentation and integrity to which it holds all other Americans.
June 6th, 2013
China is claiming control over the vast majority of the South China Sea in its latest effort to challenge U.S. authority, and President Obama must make it clear that cannot happen, warns retired U.S. Navy Admiral James “Ace” Lyons.
The New York Times recently reported that China is quietly distributing official maps to foreign diplomats showing it controls 80 percent of the South China Sea, considerably more than it has publicly claimed in the past. Six different nations have competing claims for various parts of the sea, which is rich in oil, gas and minerals. If China were recognized as controlling 80 percent of the sea, foreign planes and ships would have to seek permission to enter those critical waters.
Lyons, who served 36 years in the U.S. Navy and completed his career as commander in chief of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, told WND this simply cannot be allowed to happen, and it’s incumbent upon President Obama to stop it.
“President Obama has to be very clear and let China know we will not tolerate their illegal claims to these vast ocean areas that have been recognized for centuries as international waters,” said Lyons, who argued that Obama has a golden opportunity to set things straight this week when he meets with Chinese leader Xi Jinping in California. “This will probably be one of the first issues discussed at the summit, and I’m sure that our allies will be watching carefully how President Obama handles this issue.”
According to Lyons, the U.S. Navy policy on the South China Sea has been consistent from the beginning of our nation, and he said China benefits from the longstanding policy as well.
“The United States Navy has stood for freedom of navigation and the right of innocent passage for over 236 years, and we’re certainly not going to change course now. And we’re certainly not going to back down on that recognized principle. China has to recognize they’ve benefited greatly from that principle,” Lyons said.
The admiral warned this move by the Chinese is a major step toward a larger, more disturbing goal: surpassing the United States on the high seas.
“China has built a navy specifically to fight the United States Navy. You know, their anti-ship ballistic missile is not to go against the Bangladesh navy,” Lyons said. “We should consider that an unfriendly act. By their actions, they have thrown down the hatchet. They really are signaling to us that we are entering the 21st century where we’re in another Cold War with another communist, totalitarian regime,” he said.
So what would the best U.S. strategy be to make the Chinese reverse course?
“First of all, we have to make clear to China that we will stand by our mutual defense treaty with our allies over this issue should hostilities develop,” said Lyons, who is very critical of what he sees as decreasing of our military might.
“We have to stop this unilateral disarmament that we’ve been going through. When we have five carriers tied up at the piers in Norfolk, Va., that’s unconscionable because we don’t have the funds to operate them. So sequestration has got to be reversed.”
Most of America’s nuclear focus since the end of the Cold War centered on the Asian subcontinent, North Korea, Iran and other rogue states. Lyons said the U.S. needs to appreciate just how much of an arsenal China likely holds.
“The Russians estimate that the Chinese have over 1,800 strategic warheads. That’s much more than the 300 we give them credit for. So when we sit down with the Russians on any future arms limitations talks, the Chinese need to be forced to participate and be at the table,” Lyons said. “And to further put teeth in that, President Obama has to live up to the commitment that he made when he got Congress to sign off on the last arms treaty agreement with the Russians, and that was to modernize our strategic infrastructure and the development of a new warhead.”
Lyons admits China holding a sizable chunk of America’s debt hurts U.S. efforts to demand policy changes, but he said it’s not as big of a factor as some suggest.
“I think that works both ways. That’s one side of the equation, but we also have leverage on the other. I believe China needs us more than we need them,” he said. “They need this market here, and they can’t afford to lose it.”
Top Stories at WND
June 6th, 2013
The New York Times editorial board, which twice endorsed President Obama and has championed many planks of his agenda, on Thursday turned on the president over the government's mass collection of phone data -- saying the administration has "lost all credibility."
The grey lady's editorial section lately has shown frustration with the administration's civil liberties record. It has criticized the escalation of the lethal drone program, and it lashed out after the Justice Department acknowledged seizing reporters' phone records last month.
The report that the National Security Agency has been collecting phone records from millions of Verizon subscribers appeared to be the last straw.
An editorial published late Thursday said the administration was using the "same platitude" it uses in every case of overreach -- that "terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us."
The editorial continued: "Those reassurances have never been persuasive -- whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency's phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism -- especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability.
The administration has now lost all credibility."
The editorial board claimed Obama "is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it."
The language was a far cry from the Times' Oct. 23, 2008, endorsement of then-candidate Obama. At the time, the Times praised Obama's "cool head and sound judgment," and said he was "putting real flesh on his early promises of hope and change."
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle voiced concern on Thursday about the records collection effort. It was first reported by The Guardian newspaper, which obtained a copy of a secret court order allowing the government to collect phone call information - though not monitor the calls themselves -- directly from Verizon. Civil liberties-conscious lawmakers like Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., cried foul, as did the American Civil Liberties Union.
Lawmakers in the loop on the program tried to assuage concerns, however. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., who lead the Senate intelligence committee, defended the program as necessary to keep the country safe.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest also said there is "extensive oversight" on such activity.
"The order reprinted overnight does not allow the government to listen in on anyone's telephone calls. The information acquired does not include the content of any communications or the name of any subscriber. It relates exclusively to call details, such as a telephone number or the length of a telephone call," he said.
The Times editorial described this explanation as "lame" -- "as though there would be the slightest difficulty in matching numbers to names."
"Essentially, the administration is saying that without any individual suspicion of wrongdoing, the government is allowed to know who Americans are calling every time they make a phone call, for how long they talk and from where," the Times editorial board wrote.
The Times editorial board has long opposed The Patriot Act, which was the legal basis for the records collection, and reiterated that opposition in light of the latest revelations.
But the law's author, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., said Thursday that this application of the law was "never the intent."
More from Fox News