Image 01

Posts Tagged ‘Barack Obama’

Obama’s Islamic Envoy Admits Prior Support For Convicted Terrorism Supporter “Ill-Conceived” or “Not Well-Formulated”; 2004 Transcript Confirms Hussain As Close Friend of Al-Arian Family. UPDATE: Audio of Hussain 2004 Comments on Al-Arian Added

Saturday, February 20th, 2010

Obama's new pick for chief envoy to the Organisation of Islamic Countries ("OIC"), Harvard-educated attorney Rashad Hussain, is coming under fire late Friday evening for comments he made in 2004 claiming that the case against convicted terror supporter Professor Sami Al-Arian was part of a pattern of Bush-era terror prosecutions that Hussain claimed were "politically motivated prosecutions"

In a dramatic reversal late on Friday evening, the White House admitted that newly minted Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) US envoy, Rashad Hussain, made inappropriate comments in support of convicted terrorist supporter Sami Al-Arian. Politico notes the reversal:

President Barack Obama’s new Islamic envoy, Rashad Hussain, changed course Friday – admitting he made sharply critical statements about a U.S. terror prosecution against a Muslim professor after initially saying he had no recollection of making such comments.

“I made statements on that panel that I now recognize were ill-conceived or not well-formulated,” Hussain said, referring to a 2004 conference where he discussed the case.

Hussain’s reversal came after POLITICO obtained a recording of his presentation to a Muslim students’ conference in Chicago, where he can be heard portraying the government’s cases towards professor Sami Al-Arian, as well as other Muslim terrorism suspects, as “politically motivated persecutions.” Al-Arian later pled guilty to aiding terrorists.

The comments touched off criticism from conservative commentators, who questioned whether someone who held those views should represent the United States in the Muslim world.

Initially, Hussain, 31, said through a White House spokesman that he didn’t recall making the statements. Hussain also suggested that another speaker on the panel, Al-Arian’s daughter Laila, made the comments about her father.

As noted by Politico, the White House and Rashad Hussein before today claimed that newly appointed OIC envoy Hussain did not make statements in support of convicted terror supporter Al-Arian. Indeed, the White House and compliant journalists, like ABC’s Jake Tapper, went so far as to state as fact that the quotes by Hussain in a 2004 article were “misattributed” to him:

In 2006, Al-Arian, a Florida professor, entered into a plea agreement in which he admitted conspiring to help people associated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a group designated terrorist by the US government in 1995. Al-Arian admitted that he hid his associations with Palestinian Islamic Jihad by lying to some people, and that had been associated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad during “the late 1980s and early to mid 1990s.”

Two years before that, the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs reported that Hussain called Al-Arian’s case one from a series of “politically motivated persecutions” and that the case against Al-Arian was being “used politically to squash dissent.”

But that report was apparently erroneous. Hussein denies being the one who made the comments, and the editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, Delinda Hanley, later edited the quotes out of the story because, she says, Al-Arian’s daughter, Laila Al-Arian, actually made the comments attributed to Hussain.

ABC’s Jake Tapper, seen by many as the most independent and objective reporter in the White House News Corps, strongly pushed the Obama Administration’s talking points that the attribution of the damaging, terror sympathizer supporting comments to Hussain “was apparently erroneous” as the 2004 Washington Report article reporting them had been “edited” to remove the Hussain quotes. Sadly, Tapper, and the rest of the mainstream media, tonight failed to clearly correct their prior, false reporting but instead just edit out the offending passages, as Tapper’s article linked above no longer includes the phrase “apparently erroneous.” Prior to this evening, the left wing new media, as epitomized by Media Matters, a site that is funded by Democratic partisans, actually smeared other media sources who were questioning Hussain’s prior denials by trumpeting the White House and Tapper’s false claim that the Hussain quotes were “apparently erroneous.”

The only reason it appears Hussain, the mainstream media and the White House reversed course on the “misattribution” talking point is the surfacing of the transcript. It is troubling to this observer that the White House would so overwhelmingly push a clearly false storyline that “controversial remarks defending Al-Arian two years earlier were made by his daughter — not by Hussain” for several days and only cease such fraudulent activity when being presented with a transcript of the remarks as made by Hussain. A highly disturbing revelation from tonight’s Politico report is that Hussain himself made the call to the Washington Report last year to demand his quotes be removed from the 2004 article, despite the fact that Hussain admits making the statements:

Hussain also answered another question surrounding his comments – why they were removed from the website of a magazine on Middle East issues that published a brief account of the panel back in 2004, attributing the statement about “politically motivated persecutions” to Hussain.

It was Hussain himself, he said Friday, who contacted the publication to complain about the story.

“When I saw the article that attributed comments to me without context, leaving a misimpression, I contacted the publication to raise concerns about it. Eventually, of their own accord, they modified the article,” Hussain said of the article in the Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs.

Obviously, as Hussain himself was calling the Washington Report last year regarding his quotes in a 2004 article, Hussain, and the White House, were well aware that Hussain made the controversial comments at the Muslim Students Association conference in 2004, and not Al-Arian’s daughter as the White House has been claiming since this story broke early this week until tonight’s reversal.

Many conservatives and moderates are pointing out that the Obama Administration cannot not have key officials, like new OIC envoy Hussain, espousing such radical views of U.S. terror prosecutions. This is especially so in a case like Al-Arain’s, which, despite Hussain’s claims that the case against Al-Arain was one of many “political motivated persecutions” by Bush-era anti-terror prosecutors, resulted in a conviction of Al-Arain via guilty plea for material support of terrorism, specifically support of the Palestinian terrorist group Islamic Jihad. The Obama Administration apparently has no plans to jettison Hussain:

The White House declined to say Friday whether the statements or the controversy affected Obama’s confidence in Hussain.

The White House is now in a very difficult position as Rashad Hussain has been a key player since Inauguration Day in developing the Obama Administration’s policy on relations with the Islamic World as deputy associate counsel to President Obama, including the a substantial role in the drafting of the Obama Cairo speech and posting lengthy blog posts on the White House site regarding Islamic matters. Furthermore, Hussain has significant backing on the left, not least of which is George Soros’s support. Jettisoning Hussain now could lead to even more political opposition to Obama’s Islamic strategy and could erode the confidence in Obama of moderate Democrat politicians who are continuing to support the Obama Administration’s Islamic policy at present.

Perhaps the most disturbing revelation in tonight’s reporting on Hussain involves a deeper, personal link that Hussain revealed in the newly unearthed transcript of the 2004 comments made at an Muslim Students Association conference at Yale Law School. As noted above, one of the “politically motivated persecutions” railed against by Hussain in 2004 was the case of Professor Sami Al-Arian. Thereafter, Professor Al-Arian plead guilty to a charge of supporting terrorist activity, admitting that he conspired to help Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a terrorist group, and was closely associated with Palestinian Islamic Jihad during “the late 1980s and early to mid 1990s.”

During that period of time, the Palestinian terror group Islamic Jihad was engaged in the murder of civilians in Israel and elsewhere, and Al-Arian’s admitted support of such group is unacceptable and abhorrent, and cannot be tolerated by Americans. Hussain himself appears to be a close family friend of the Al-Arian’s, as the 2004 transcript confirms that Hussain was close with Professor Al-Arian’s son, Abdullah Al-Arian:

In his speech, Hussain revealed another link that may have left him sympathetic for Al-Arian. Hussain indicated he was acquainted with Al-Arian’s son Abdullah, while both were college students in North Carolina.

Hussain told the audience that he was on hand when Abdullah Al-Arian was abruptly removed by the Secret Service from a White House meeting in June 2001, prompting a walkout by Muslim leaders. President George W. Bush later apologized for the incident, which a spokesman called “wrong and inappropriate.”

The extent of the relationship between Hussain and the Al-Arian family is sure to come under close scrutiny in the days to come as Hussain attempts to ride out this embarrassing, forced admission and keep his job as Obama’s top Islamic advisor in the years to come.  Convicted terrorism supporter Professor Al-Arian’s family appears to have fantastic connections with the left wing media and Democrat Party, as son Abdullah Al-Arian interned for Democrat House Member David Bonior in 2001 while daughter Laila Al-Arian works for Al-Jezerra in DC and is warmly embraced by left wing new media.

The fervor over the flip-flop by the Obama Administration on whether Hussain made the 2004 comments, as well as over the extent of Hussain’s relationship with the Al-Arian family (as such family includes one convicted terror supporter, Sami Al-Arian), could continue into next week.  The political heat on this matter may end up costing Hussain his new job as the chief Islamic envoy as many conservatives and moderates could object to the concept of a convicted Islamic terrorism supporter’s family friend being the United States’ chief Islamic envoy and call upon Obama to fire Hussain or at least ask him to resign.

UPDATE:  Powerline links over, thanks for the link guys, welcome to Powerline readers.   By way of substantive update, go here for Politico’s audio tape of Hussain’s 2004 comments in support of Al-Arian

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Breaking News: CIA and Pakistani Intelligence Capture Taliban’s Number Two Leader, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar – Interrogation to Shape Obama detainee policy – UPDATE – CBS News’s Expert Concurs: “Most Important Event…in the War on Terrorism in Years”

Monday, February 15th, 2010

The CIA captures

The CIA captures Mullah Baradar, Number Two Commander in the Taliban and the greatest success in the War on Terror since Obama's Inauguration

Outstanding news in the War on Terror from the New York Times:  Operatives of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) worked in tandem to capture the top military commander of the Taliban, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. The NYT details the importance of Mullah Baradar’s capture and ongoing interrogation:

The commander, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, is an Afghan described by American officials as the most significant Taliban figure to be detained since the American-led war in Afghanistan started more than eight years ago. He ranks second in influence only to Mullah Muhammad Omar, the Taliban’s founder and a close associate of Osama bin Laden before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Mullah Baradar has been in Pakistani custody for several days, with American and Pakistani intelligence officials both taking part in interrogations, according to the officials.

It was unclear whether he was talking, but the officials said his capture had provided a window into the Taliban and could lead to other senior officials. Most immediately, they hope he will provide the whereabouts of Mullah Omar, the one-eyed cleric who is the group’s spiritual leader.

Disclosure of Mullah Baradar’s capture came as American and Afghan forces were in the midst of a major offensive in southern Afghanistan.

His capture could cripple the Taliban’s military operations, at least in the short term, said Bruce O. Riedel, a C.I.A. veteran who last spring led the Obama administration’s Afghanistan and Pakistan policy review.

Details of the raid remain murky, but officials said that it had been carried out by Pakistan’s military spy agency, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, and that C.I.A. operatives had accompanied the Pakistanis.

Without question, this is the most favorable development in the War on Terror since the beginning of the Obama Administration. Noone quite knows why the ISI has now begun cooperating with the CIA in capturing high-ranking Taliban leaders, as for many years since 9/11, foreign policy analysts and even US Afghanistan Commander General Stanley McChrystal have speculated that the ISI has been covertly assisting the Taliban:

In a recent report, General McChrystal explains Taliban fighters in Afghanistan are aided by international intelligence agencies, referring specifically to Iran’s Quds Force and Pakistan’s ISI. This is perhaps the first time a top ranking official cites current, and direct links between the state run ISI and Taliban. McChrystal says the insurgency in Afghanistan is supported by way of aid given through “some elements of Pakistan’s ISI”. That is alarming, and definitely runs against our interests.

With Mullah Baradar’s capture, the pressure on Mullah Omar, the head honcho of the Taliban, who remains at large, increases significantly. As Mullah Baradar has been undergoing interrogation by the ISI and CIA since Thursday, presumably significant information has been gleaned from him and from the electronic devices and documents found on or about his person upon capture. Such information undoubtedly relates in some fashion to the whereabouts of Mullah Omar, who’s days of freedom are hopefully numbered now that Omar’s military commander, Mullah Baradar, has been captured.

Indeed, the yoke of the State Department upon CIA activities appears to have been lifted once and for all regarding the Taliban as Mullah Baradar was deeply involved in negotiations with the Karzai regime in Kabul in the past few years, as noted by Newsweek last summer:

Back in 2004, according to Maulvi Arsala Rahmani, a former Taliban cabinet minister who now lives in Kabul, Baradar authorized a Taliban delegation that approached Karzai with a peace offer, even paying their travel expenses to Kabul. That outreach fizzled, but earlier this year another two senior Taliban operatives sent out separate peace feelers to Qayyum Karzai, the Afghan president’s older brother, apparently with Baradar’s approval, according to three ranking Taliban sources. They say the initiatives were quickly rescinded. Still, when NEWSWEEK spoke to the elder Karzai last week and asked him about the story, he did not deny that such contacts had taken place, saying only, “This is a very sensitive time, and a lot of things are going on.”

Despite all the talk from the Obama Administration about an “outreach” to the “moderate” elements of the Taliban via negotiations floating about, it appears that the CIA’s governor is now removed and with ISI cooperation, Mullah Omar’s remaining days may be few in number. Perhaps this recent aggressive US posture was foreshadowed by this Friday, February 12, 2010 comment from previously-dovish Richard Holbrooke:

The administration has responded uncertainly to Karzai’s outreach to the Taliban — even though it flies in the face of what top US officials were saying just two months ago.

“The separation of the Taliban from al Qaeda is not currently on the horizon. The leaders of the Taliban and the al Qaeda are deeply intermeshed,” US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke told a Council on Foreign Relations audience in mid-December. “It is our judgment that, if the Taliban succeed in Afghanistan, they will bring back with them to Afghanistan al Qaeda.”

All told, the CIA’s cooperative action with the ISI, resulting in the capture of Mullah Baradar, is the most substantial progress in the War on Terror since Obama’s Inauguration. Considering the incoming fire from the Obama White House and Department of Justice taken by the CIA since Inauguration Day, including the loss of detainee interrogation responsibilities and reopened criminal investigations into the actions of CIA operatives during the Bush Administration, it is indeed ironic that the CIA has now delivered to the Obama Administration their most stunning success in the War on Terror to date.

A centrist independent observer of these developments can only take joy in the CIA’s weakening of the Taliban and the reforming of the ISI’s past misguided policies of support for the Taliban. One can only hope that the Obama Administration now lays off the continued attacks, both rhetorical and legal, upon the CIA and frees up the fine men and women of the CIA to accelerate their efforts to stamp out the Taliban’s leadership once and for all.

One can only wonder whether Mullah Baradar is being interrogated solely as directed in the Army Field Manual, as directed by Obama upon his banning of all other interrogation techniques last year. Furthermore, if the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group, or HIG, which was first authorized in August 2009 but first became operational only after the Christmas Day Bomber in February 2010, is being utilized in Mullah Baradar’s interrogation. Indeed, the HIG was created primarily to shift the “the center of gravity away from the CIA and giving the White House direct oversight.” Is or will HIG be used here, to shift the “center of gravity away from the CIA,” despite the CIA’s central role in Mullah Baradar’s capture? Finally, the Administration’s response as to whether Mullah Baradar was mirandized upon capture will surely come under great scrutiny. Taken together, the next few days, and the Obama Administration’s response to the above-listed questions, may end up shaping the Obama’s Administration’s detainee interrogations policy for the remainder of Obama’s term considering Mullah Baradar’s indisputable status as the most important captured terrorist since Obama’s inauguration.

UPDATE: CBS News concurs with Centristnet, with their Taliban expert calling the capture of Mullah Baradar and the ISI’s cooperation in doing so the “most important event in years” in the War on Terror:

Haroun Mir, a leading expert on the Afghan Taliban movement, tells CBS News the arrest of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar is “the most important event in the war against the Taliban and the war on terrorism in years.”

“This is a significant blow to the Taliban. In the past they have been able to replace leaders, and no doubt they will replace him, but there are not many members of the Quetta Shura who can step into his role,” Mir told CBS News producer Ben Plesser in Kabul, referring to the Afghan Taliban by its traditional name.

But the implications of Baradar’s arrest for America and its allies in the war against Islamic fundamentalism may be far greater than the tactical victory of nabbing the purported No. 2 commander of the group.

“The real significance is the change in the Pakistani policy,” explains Mir.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama Returns to Rhetoric of Bipartisanship, One Year Later; Reality Mixed

Monday, February 15th, 2010

A week and a year after formally eschewing bipartisan governance with his speech at the House Democratic Retreat on February 6, 2009, in the aftermath of Republican Scott Brown’s election to the Senate in Massachusetts, President Barack Obama has returned to the rhetoric of bipartisanship as a central focus. As the polls were set to close on Brown’s January 19, 2010 Election day shocker, Obama summoned his former campaign manager, David Pfloffe, to the White House for a lengthy meeting to plan a strategic response. It appears to this observer that Pfloffe’s strategy, as adopted by Obama in the past few weeks, is to have Obama use his personal charisma to talk up the themes of the 2008 campaigh: the need for “change” regarding partisan governance, “Washington’s ways” and the dominance of special interests.

According to post-January 19, 2010 Obama, all of the above problems in Washington can be solved if the GOP would just “come to the table” and negotiate bipartisan policies with a willing Obama. From a communications strategy viewpoint, it appears the Pfloffe bipartisanship strategy has been fairly successful, as it appears that Obama has stanched the bleeding somewhat as his recent fall in approval has slowed to stabilize at approximately 48-49% approval. The key question, of course, for a centrist observer of these events is whether Obama’s return to the rhetoric of bipartisanship will be matched by actual negotiations with the GOP that result in centrist policy proposals or just more advocacy of his present left-wing agenda. Indeed, as former Office of Personnel Management Director Capretta posits:

In the daily back-and-forth of political news coverage, it is easy to lose sight of what a stunning turnabout this renewed interest in bipartisanship represents for Barack Obama. For more than a year, his administration attempted to govern based on an entirely different approach. The Democrats in the White House and on Capitol Hill welcomed any Republican willing to jump aboard their legislative plans. But, as the president and his top advisers repeatedly said, they were going to move ahead with “their agenda” — with or without willing Republican participation.

Any discussion of Obama’s proclivities and bipartisan bona fides must begin and essentially end with a discussion of the signature issue of his Presidency: health care reform. The next major event in the health care reform debate is the President’s “Health Care Summit” designed by the Administration and set for February 25, 2010. The Administration has noted it will produce a “compromise” version of its health care reform legislation before the summit, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid, along with Administration officials, are negotiating that “compromise” version this week.

As it stands now, there is no GOP input into these final negotiations between Obama and Congress regarding health care reform. Indeed, as the Democrats are negotiating a “compromise” version of health care reform now, and will produce it prior to the 2.25.2010 Health Care Summit with the GOP, the likelihood of an true centrist compromise between liberals and conservatives seems highly unlikely.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Age of Post-Partisanship Ends After 17 Days

Friday, February 6th, 2009

Fans of centrist governance were disappointed this evening as President Barack Obama strongly signaled a return to the polarizing ideological battles of years and campaigns past.  Obama’s first use of Air Force One as President was to travel to the House Democratic retreat in Williamsburg and deliver the most partisan speech of his young presidency.   The President let loose with familiar campaign talking points such as the “failed policies of the past” in reference to Republican opposition to the stimulus package moving through Congress.

Tonights Speech Packs a Punch for the GOP

Tonight's Speech Packs a Punch for the GOP

The Democratic retreat was slated to be closed to the media until this evening, when all the networks were invited in to record Obama’s speech.  The clear intent of the move was to control the media cycle through the weekend and perhaps mark a clean break from the relentless media focus on unpopular aspects of the House and Senate packages.  Whether Obama will succeed with tonight’s speech remains an open question.  However, tonight marks the end of the rhetoric of bipartisanship which played a prominent role in the campaign.

Faced with an erosion of 10-15% support of his stimulus package over the past few weeks, Obama faced his first political crisis and responded by launching into starkly partisan rhetoric while also pushing the virtues of the present make up of the bill.   A bipartisan group of Senators have been discussing the package and trying to work out a compromise, unified by their distaste for some of the questionable spending. Candidate Obama would welcome these bipartisan negotiations on such vitally important issues and also promised to bring such partisans together with a new pragmatic, post-partisan governance.

Instead of speaking out substantively with his vision of a bipartisan compromise in the Senate, Obama has chosen to retreat to partisan talking points coupled with a demand to pass the package immediately or face catastrophe.   By refusing to take a substantive stance of what a bipartisan compromise should look like, yet lambasting any opponents of the present Democrat-written bill, Obama has set a troubling model for future legislation that may require bipartisan cooperation to pass, such as immigration reform.

From this point forward for the Administration, we’ll be seeing less of the GOP-Obama meetings on substantive policy and more Obama speeches geared towards firing up his base and pushing the growth of his 13 Million person email list from the campaign.  Independents and centrists must give Obama credit for at least attempting to change the tenor in Washington over the past few weeks by engaging in outreach to Republicans and bringing GOP Senator Judd Gregg into the cabinet.   Unfortunately, Obama has chosen to avoid spending political capital to support and perhaps lead the bipartisan group of Senators to forge a centrist compromise by laying out a detailed vision of the final bill with input from the bipartisan group.   Instead, the bills written exclusively by ascendant Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid will very likely become law.

Beyond the perhaps inevitable end of the rhetoric of post-partisanship, the sad truth for fiscally conservative independents is that the largest spending bill in American history is going to be passed without the standard, lengthy scrutiny applied to normal appropriations bills and without any serious input from centrist politicians.  Many objective analyses of the present stimulus package recommend substantial reductions in questionable spending and other major alterations to maximize to possibility of actual job creation from the bill.   Rasmussen and Gallup polls show significant public support for such major changes.  Based on tonight’s speech, any such coolheaded, pragmatic reworking of the present package appears off the table, with perhaps a window-dressing compromise to “reduce” the outlay to around 800-850 Billion in the offing.

Obama’s return to partisan attacks on republicans and deployment of his speechmaking greatness to push the present stimulus package will likely blunt the faltering public faith in the entire enterprise.   The application of raw political power by Obama today teaches the moderates of the Senate, some of which formed the bipartisan group of 17 senators, that Obama will not support future pragmatic, centrist compromises but instead push the conventional democratic view.   The new lightening rod in partisan politics is the Democratic stimulus package, and the bill’s effect on the economy will dominate partisan debate for years to come as the Age of Partisanship begins again.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Congratulations President Elect Barack Obama

Tuesday, November 4th, 2008

As Ohio goes Democrat, Barack Obama has swept to victory tonight to seize the right to become the 44th President of the United States. CentristNet congratulates President-Elect Obama for his incredibly innovative and successful campaign and strong victory over John McCain. In the end, despite all the discussion of a new map, the same state that denied John Kerry victory four years ago awarded victory to Obama: Ohio. The Republican brand was so heavily damaged over the past four years that Ohioians and Pennsylvanians simply could not countenance another four years of GOP control of the Presidency.

The key issue for centrists now is how President Obama will govern. Independents and centrists are hopeful that Obama will choose to govern from the center, notwithstanding the leftist rhetoric that has sometimes emanated from Obama. A serious move to ratchet up federal control over the economy, such as nationalized health care, oil companies and/or auto companies, could deepen the ongoing economic slowdown. A centrist policy of keeping spending in check while avoiding large tax hikes would allow for a quicker recovery. Governing from the center would allow for recent gains in Iraq and Afghanistan to be consolidated and American military credibility to be enhanced upon those gains. A move to a quick withdrawal from Iraq would probably destroy the credibility built by our recent military success in Iraq and encourage other states to engage in military adventurism.

In the days, months and years to come, America will determine whether or not the vote for change, and Barack Obama, was a wise choice. Should Obama govern from the center in a pragmatic fashion, the Obama presidency would enhance American leadership of the world and solidify America’s place as the world’s leading power. If Obama goes strongly left, the Obama presidency could be seen historically as a turning point in world history when America went from being the exceptional leader to being just another country in a multipolar world.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November Surprise? Auntie Z Story Takes Dramatic Turn

Monday, November 3rd, 2008

November Surprise?

November Surprise?

As most of America knows, Barack Obama is now poised to sweep to victory with at least 300 Electoral Votes, holding a massive eight point lead on average nationally over McCain at this late date. Several stories have bubbled up in the past few days, such as Obama’s comments on the coal industry, his alleged crude gesture towards McCain at a rally today and the identification of his Aunt as living in Boston, albeit without Obama’s knowledge according to his campaign. However, none of these stories seem to have the sheer force to push McCain up the giant electoral hill facing him tomorrow.

A late breaking story today could make the next 24 hours much more interesting as explosive allegations were published today in the American Spectator regarding Obama’s Aunt Zeituni Onyango (“Auntie Z”) confirming that the Obama Campaign and Mass. Governor Deval Patrick had knowledge of her illegal status and willful violation of the 2004 deportation order as early as 2007. If true, such actions by the Obama campaign and Patrick could constitute criminal acts according to Section 1324 under 8 U.S.C.A. 1324 (a)(1)(A)(iii) and (v).

The main source on for the published article regarding the Obama campaign’s knowledge of Auntie Z’s situation is an employee at AKP&D Message and Media, which is a political consulting firm employed by the Obama campaign. A secondary source for the fact that the Obama campaign was well aware of the status of Obama’s family members is an Obama campaign media aide. The gist of the allegations is that in early 2007, David Axelrod, the crack chief strategist for the Obama campaign, ordered a full investigation of all of Obama’s family members to prepare/defend against possible political attacks regarding Obama’s family during the campaign.

Obama’s position is that he had no knowledge of Auntie Z’s status as an illegal alien:

KATIE COURIC: you have an aunt who’s been living in this country apparently illegally, and your campaign says any and all appropriate laws should be followed. So would you support her being deported to Kenya?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA: If she has violated laws, then those laws have to be obeyed. We’re a nation of laws. And, obviously, that doesn’t lessen my concern for her. I haven’t been able to get in touch with her. But, I’m a strong believer that you obey the law.

According the main source at OBama’s political consulting firm, AKP&D Message and Media, here’s how Obama’s campaign came into knowledge of Auntie Z’s status and how it was dealt with:

Axelrod had actual knowledge of Auntie Z and all other relatives in early 2007, and decided to use Deval Patrick as a monitor over Auntie Z to make sure she stayed out of trouble and out of the media’s eye:

Back in early 2007, as Obama’s chief campaign strategist David Axelrod was organizing and planning the Obama campaign, he identified Obama’s unique family situation — a number of half-brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, some living overseas — as a potential problem, says an employee for Axelrod’s political consulting firm, and who has done work on the Obama campaign. “Given [Obama’s] father’s family history here and in Africa, David wanted the campaign to know who was who, where they lived, and what they were doing. No surprises. We knew she was here illegally. We knew her income levels, but I don’t think anyone from the campaign had had contact with her.”

Instead, according to the source, Axelrod reached out to his former client, Patrick, who had retained Axelrod’s firm for his run for governor. Onyango was living in a state-funded housing project, “so Patrick’s people could just as easily keep track of things, and could do it without drawing a ton of attention,” says the AKP&D Message and Media employee, who requested anonymity as he hopes to get a job in an Obama administration should the candidate win. “If we had Obama people around, the media would probably have found her much sooner. She was in [Obama’s] book, it wasn’t like she couldn’t be found.” Indeed, that is exactly how the London Times found her.

While the South Boston housing project is managed by the Boston Housing Authority, it is a state-funded facility, according to the BHA press office, and so it would not be uncommon for state housing officials to be on the grounds or in the area. “Patrick was the go-between, he’s trusted by David and Senator Obama,” says the aide.

An Obama campaign aide, the second source, at least partially confirms the AKP&D Message and Media employee’s account with respect to Axelrod’s knowledge of all Obama relatives:

Some Obama aides believe that Obama was briefed at least twice by Axelrod or campaign manager David Plouffe on the status of family members. “We tracked who was talking to the press, we kept in touch with some of these people,” says an Obama campaign media aide. “Anyone who thinks we didn’t doesn’t understand just how nervous we were about all of these people, particularly the members of [Obama’s] father’s family. Axelrod had everything covered.” The aide said she was never present for such a briefing, but “we all knew the candidate’s family was being taken care of, to protect their privacy and try to contain any damage.”

To summarize, according to the two sources quoted by American Spectator, the Obama campaign was well aware of Auntie Z’s immigration status and presence in America in early 2007. Furthermore, if true, the Obama’s campaign used Axelrod’s client and Obama’s ally, Patrick, to keep watch over Auntie Z until after the election. The allegations of the two sources is confirmed in part by Auntie Z’s quoted response to the British press before they broke the story:

“I can’t talk about it, I just pray for him, that’s all,” she said, adding: “After the 4th, I can talk to anyone.”

It is well within the realm of possibility that Auntie Z would have only known to refuse comment if she was told to say that, likely by the Obama campaign. The two sources, Obama’s political consultant’s employee and the Obama campaign media aide, bolster this likely occurrance. The importance to tomorrow’s election becomes whether or not such agreement between the Obama campaign and Patrick to “monitor” Auntie Z until the election is a vioation of federal immigration laws, namely 8 U.S.C.A. 1324(a)(1)(a)(iii) and (v), which prohibit as a felony:

(a) Criminal Penalties
(1)(a) Any person who…
(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;…
(v)(I) engages in any conspiracy to commit any of the preceding acts, or

(II) aids or abets the commission of any of the preceding acts,

If the Obama campaign had knowledge of Auntie Z’s immigration status in early 2007, and then Axelrod worked with Patrick to suppress any uncovering of such status since then, there is an arguable violation of the statute above as such actions would each constitute an individual act which “conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien”, as spelled out in (iii) in the statute above. Any Obama campaign employees or Patrick staffers could be liable for conspiracy to commit violations of the Section 1324 and aiding and abetting violations of Section 1324 under subsection (v).

A review of case law regarding this matter tends to support the position that the Obama campaign’s activities, in conjunction with Mass. Governor Patrick, could have violated Section 1324. Indeed, the entire purpose of Axelrod’s alleged contacts with Patrick regarding Auntie Z was to suppress the public disclosure of Auntie Z’s illegal alien status and the lawful, immediate deportation under the 2004 Order. If true, the statements quoted in the American Spectator make out a prima facia case for a criminal indictment under Section 1324. As the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, U.S. v. Cantu, 557 F.2d 1173 (5th Cir. 1977) opines:

We agree with the conclusion in Lopez that section 1324 does not prohibit only smuggling-related activity, but also activity “tending substantially to facilitate an alien’s ‘remaining in the United States illegally.’ ” 521 F.2d at 441.

Jury instruction as to meaning of “shield.” Cantu requested that, in charging the jury concerning the meaning of “shield” as used in section 1324, the district judge include as a synonym the word “hide.” The judge declined to include “hide,” and Cantu contends that this refusal was error. Although “shield” and “hide” may in some contexts be synonymous, in the context of section 1324 they are not. Section 1324 forbids attempts “to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection.” Were “shield from detection” used synonymously with “hide” then “conceal” would be redundant. Therefore, the district judge did not err in omitting from his charge “hide” as a synonym for “shield from detection.”

If Axelrod coordinated with Patrick to keep watch over Auntie Z since early 2007, with knowledge of Auntie Z’s status as facing a deportation order, a prima facia case can be made under Section 1324 for a criminal indictment. Considering the seriousness of these allegations, CentristNet hopes that the mainstream media moves to ask these questions before America votes tomorrow. Moderate, centrist and independent voters will be on the edge of their seats to see what the Obama campaign and the mainstream media has to say about his interesting controversy.

The ultimate question is whether voters agree with Obama’s position that he had no knowledge of Auntie Z’s situation, or whether voters tend to distrust Obama’s position that he had no knowledge. Perhaps such issues will be irrelevant as Obama has promised not to speak wth the press until after the election. Regardless, the Auntie Z episode leaves many questions unanswered by the Obama campaign, and every centrist, independent moderate voter can only hope that the Obama campaign decides to provide information regarding their actions pertaining to Auntie Z prior to the election tomorrow.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Greatest One Day Stock Rally in History – Will McCain or Obama Benefit?

Monday, October 13th, 2008

Will the Rally Help McCain?

Will the Rally Help McCain?

Never in the history of the Dow Jones Industrial Average has the index risen more than 500 points in a single session. After last week’s historic largest weekly percentage loss ever, today the greatest one-day rally in the history of Wall Street occurred, with the Dow Jones average rising almost 1000 points to close at about 9400, up 11%. One key question on everyone’s mind tonight is whether the rally will last or if is the last gasp of the bull market that disappeared last week. The other key question is whether McCain can use this rally to get past narrative of defeat that has smothered his campaign since the crisis began.

Most political observers agree that the race between Obama and McCain for the presidency turned from a near dead heat in mid-September into a substantial 7 point Obama lead today because of the crash of the U.S. and world financial markets. The freefall in McCain’s popularity has been greatly assisted during the economic crisis by McCain’s early mishandling of the crisis via his oft-repeated line that “the fundamentals of the economy are strong.” Many independent and centrist voters were turned off by McCain’s stubborn refusal to accept the depth of the problems in the economy and now lean towards Obama.

The final straw to put many swing voters onto Obama’s side was the quarter ending 401K reports which show striking declines in most Americans’ retirement accounts that came in the mail in the past week or so. Whether the nearly 1000 point rally can turn this trend around will be determined in the days to come.

The onus is clearly on McCain to perform in the upcoming debate and use the turning economic news to his advantage quickly and perhaps avoid the imminent landslide facing him today. Obama can also point to his steady leadership as pleasing to Wall Street and further highlight McCain’s erratic performance in the past month.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

RICO Action To Be Filed Against ACORN Tomorrow

Monday, October 13th, 2008

ACORNgate threatens Obamas Lead

ACORNgate threatens Obama's Lead


Over the past few days, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN, has come under scrutiny across in a dozen battleground states regarding their voter registration activities. The most high profile government move to date in this election against ACORN is the FBI’s raiding of Nevada’s ACORN office last week. Today, the scrutiny on ACORN’s voter registration methods continued with election board hearings in all-important Cuyhoga County, Ohio, which encompasses Cleveland.

Tomorrow, the next shoe will drop as a lawsuit in Ohio will initiate a wide-ranging RICO action against ACORN and its subsidiaries. RICO is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and it provides for extended penalties for criminal acts performed as part of an ongoing criminal organization while also providing a civil cause of action for those injured by violations of the act. The “organization” is ACORN and its subsidiaries, and the criminal acts are the forgery of voter signatures as reported in various states nationwide.

The Obama campaign’s response to the GOP claims of ACORN ties has been uneven at best to date. First, via the “Fight the Smears” website, Obama claimed that he never trained any ACORN workers nor worked for or with ACORN at any time. Almost immediately, evidence of Obama’s representation of ACORN in a voter registration lawsuit in the mid-90’s and multiple published reports of Obama’s training of ACORN organizers surfaced, along with evidence of an $800,000.00 payment to an ACORN subsidary from the Obama campaign this summer. A video of Obama himself stating he’d worked side by side with ACORN for years and will do so indefinitely also reinforced his longstanding ties. Predictably, Obama’s website was then alterered to state that Obama was never a paid employee of ACORN, implicitly conceding the misrepresentations of the initial statement denying any Obama ties to ACORN.

With the new high profile RICO action coming tomorrow, “ACORNgate” could be the first major scandal of the general election. Before now, both Obama’s (Ayers, Wright, Rezko) and McCain’s (Keating) scandals have been rehashings from either the primaries or past campaigns. How the Obama campaign deals with the coming media firestorm tomorrow upon the filing of the action against ACORN could decide the election as ACORNgate may be the last, best chance for McCain to gain traction against Obama in the presidential race.

The effect on the presidential race is could be significant. Centrists and independent voters have little tolerance for explicit fraud by either side in electioneering. Obama is pulling away from McCain in the head-to-head national race presently, now standing at his highest lead of the campaign of about 7%. If McCain can effectively tie Obama to ACORN, those independents and centrists now leaning to Obama may take a second look at McCain and put the race back to a dead even contest going into the final few weeks of the campaign.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama Buys Up Primetime on Networks as McCain Reaches Nadir of Campaign

Thursday, October 9th, 2008

Obama in Catbirds Seat

Obama in Catbird's Seat


In a stunning move only attempted once in presidential election history, the Obama campaign today finalized a deal to purchase an entire half hour block of broadcasting time from a major network. CBS sold Obama a half hour of time on Wednesday, October 29th, starting at 8:00PM. It appears Obama will present his closing argument to the American people in this fashion as negotiations are also ongoing with NBC and Fox for a similar half hour block of evening broadcasting.

The news of Obama’s strong network buy comes at time when John McCain’s campaign stands at its nadir and possibly its last legs. Three of the four debates are over, and both instant polls and later larger surveys of each debate show the public siding with the Democratic ticket. More troubling for the McCain campaign is the strong voter move to Obama over the past few weeks as world’s stock markets have steadily sold off with no end in sight. Indeed, today’s selloff of the Dow Jones Industrial Average pushed below 9000, the first time the Dow Jones has seen such depths since August of 2003, to close at 8,579.19. Over 20% of of the Dow Jones has been lost in the past seven trading days, nearing the 22.6% selloff on Black Monday in 1987.

Obama’s purchase of blocks of primetime network time follows in the footsteps of Ross Perot in 1992, the only prior presidential candidate to buy such half hour blocks of network time. In 1992, Perot purchased blocks of time on NBC and even beat some of the other networks for ratings at the time. Considering Obama’s popularity, Obama’s primetime show will undoubtably beat Perot’s numbers and perhaps all other competing broadcasting.

The move into blocks of network time comes on the heels of Obama’s purchase of an entire satellite channel, Channel 73, on the Dish TV network last week. Channel 73 is looping an effective two minute Obama economy ad entitled Barack Obama’s Plan for America. The fundraising advantage of the Obama campaign enables such large and unprecedented media buys and sets up Obama for a strong closing message.

Against that backdrop, the McCain campaign continued with a focus on Obama’s relationship with ex-terrorist William Ayers and explaining McCain’s debate night proposal to buy up mortgages directly and renegotiate them downward with the homeowners. Neither initiative appears to have picked up steam, and the media narrative continues to be dominated by discussion of Obama’s surge in popularity since the economic crisis began.

Centrist, independent and moderate voters are moving strongly towards Obama, and McCain has yet to find the right message to stem that tide. Considering the shocked reaction of many Americans to the recent stock market collapse, and Obama’s skillful linkage of this crash to the GOP as the market’s “final verdict” on GOP’s economic policies, no message may fit the bill for McCain.

McCain now stands nearly 10 points behind in most national tracking polls, with the esteemed Gallup tracking poll showing Obama with a commanding, campaign-best 11 point lead, 52-41%. State polls are following suit, with McCain at his lowest support level of the campaign in battlegrounds such as Virginia, Indiana, North Carolina, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida. With only one debate to go and less than four weeks until election day, the McCain campaign is teetering on the edge of a collapse in support which would result in a electoral landslide not seen since Reagan’s victory over Mondale in 1984.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama Debate Gaffe – The U.S. Government Invented the Computer

Tuesday, October 7th, 2008

Quick takeaway from the 2nd presidential debate – Obama claimed specifically that U.S. government invented the computer, and Obama was very wrong. The computer was developed over a long period of time, and by most historical accounts trace back to Europe with British and German inventors in the late 19th and early 20th century for the conceptual idea of a computer. For a functioning machine, most historical accounts point to a Iowa State University professor and his graduate student:

“I have always taken the position that there is enough credit for everyone in the invention and development of the electronic computer” – John Atanasoff to reporters.

Professor John Atanasoff and graduate student Clifford Berry built the world’s first electronic-digital computer at Iowa State University between 1939 and 1942. The Atanasoff-Berry Computer represented several innovations in computing, including a binary system of arithmetic, parallel processing, regenerative memory, and a separation of memory and computing functions.

Neither CNN, MSNBC nor Fox News have mentioned this so far. We’ll see if it develops in the days to come.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,