Keeping track of the outright lies that have come out of the Obama Administration has gone beyond a mere full time job, it has reached the point where it now requires a industry entirely devoted to doing so. Sadly, the one industry that was tasked with doing just such a job, has become utterly corrupt, that industry being the Fifth column Treasonous Media. Rather than keeping the American informed regarding the unending multitude of Obamanation Administration lies and deceits, they have chosen to hide, conceal, obfuscate and minimize those lies and deceits.
Even so, those lies are coming to light, proving the old adage, “You can’t hide the truth forever, sooner or later it comes out”.
Just two years before the presidential election, the Census Bureau had caught an employee fabricating data that went into the unemployment report, which is one of the most closely watched measures of the economy.
And a knowledgeable source says the deception went beyond that one employee — that it escalated at the time President Obama was seeking reelection in 2012 and continues today.
“He’s not the only one,” said the source, who asked to remain anonymous for now but is willing to talk with the Labor Department and Congress if asked.
The Census employee caught faking the results is Julius Buckmon, according to confidential Census documents obtained by The Post. Buckmon told me in an interview this past weekend that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census.
How did the manipulation take place? The key to this puzzle is in the methodology used by BLS to derive the jobless rate. They conduct two surveys, Household and Establishment. The jobless rate comes from the former, while the official jobs added figure comes from the latter. It was the Household survey that picked up the highly unlikely figure of 873,000 jobs added in September, which wasn’t the official jobs added figure (that was +114K), but skewed the jobless rate significantly downward anyway — even while the U-6 overall unemployment/underemployment figure didn’t budge at all.
Certain members of the GOP were all to aware that this was going to happen, they even made tepid attempts to prevent it’s happening.
GOP Sounds Alarm Over Obama Decision to Move Census to White House
Published February 09, 2009
Utah’s congressional delegation is calling President Obama’s decision to move the U.S. census into the White House a purely partisan move and potentially dangerous to congressional redistricting around the country.
Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, told FOX News on Monday that he finds it hard to believe the Obama administration felt the need to place re-evaluation of the inner workings of the census so high on his to-do list, just three weeks into his presidency.
“This is nothing more than a political land grab,” Chaffetz said.
Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, told the Salt Lake Tribune that the move “shouldn’t happen.” He and Chaffetz are trying to rally Republicans “before its too late.”
“It takes something that is supposedly apolitical like the census, and gives it to a guy who is infamously political,” Bishop said of Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who would be tasked with overseeing the census at the White House.
The U.S. census — a counting of the U.S. population — is conducted every 10 years by the Commerce Department. Its results determine the decennial redrawing of congressional districts
As a matter of impact, the census has tremendous political significance. Political parties are always eager to have a hand in redrawing districts so that they can maximize their own party’s clout while minimizing the opposition, often through gerrymandering.
The census also determines the composition of the Electoral College, which chooses the president. If one party were to control the census, it could arguably try to perpetuate its hold on political power.
The results of the census are also enormously important in another way — the allocation of federal funds. Theoretically, a political party could disproportionately steer federal funding to areas dominated by its own members through a skewing of census numbers.
At this point the White House doesn’t seem willing to say what Emanuel’s role will be in overseeing the census, and White House officials say census managers will work closely with top-level White House staffers, but will technically remain part of the Commerce Department.
But critics say the White House chief of staff can’t be expected to handle the census in a neutral manner. Emanuel ran the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the 2006 election, and he was instrumental in getting Democrats elected into the majority.
“The last thing the census needs is for any hard-bitten partisan (either a Karl Rove or a Rahm Emanuel) to manipulate these critical numbers. Many federal funding formulas depend on them, as well as the whole fabric of federal and state representation. Partisans have a natural impulse to tilt the playing field in their favor, and this has to be resisted,” Larry Sabato, the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, told FOX News in an e-mail.
Critics note that the method of counting can skew the census. Democrats have long advocated using mathematical estimates, a practice known as “sampling,” to count urban residents and immigrants. Republicans say the Constitution requires a physical head count, which entails going door-to-door.
In 2000, Utah, which has three congressmen, was extremely close to landing a fourth House seat based on U.S. Census numbers, but the nation’s most conservative state fell short by a few hundred votes because the Census Bureau wouldn’t count Mormon missionaries from Utah serving temporarily overseas.
The GOP took the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, but was ultimately unsuccessful. Utah leaders had hoped the 2010 census would rectify the problem, but now worry that they will lose again if the census is managed by partisans.
Everyone has heard about the “If you like” lies, but few have yet to really grasp how systemic and endemic that culture of lying is within the Obamanation Administration.
But that’s not the half of it. Obama’s claim that unwelcome cancellations are confined to the individual-insurance market is another brazen lie. In the weekend column, I link to the excellent work of Powerline’s John Hinderaker, who has demonstrated that, for over three years, the Obama administration’s internal estimates have shown that most Americans who are covered by “employer plans” will also lose their coverage under Obamacare. Mind you, 156 million Americans get health coverage through their jobs.
John cites the Federal Register, dated June 17, 2010, beginning at page 34,552 (Vol. 75, No. 116). It includes a chart that outlines the Obama administration’s projections. The chart indicates that somewhere between 39 and 69 percent of employer plans would lose their “grandfather” protection by 2013. In fact, for small-business employers, the high-end estimate is a staggering 80 percent (and even on the low end, it’s just a shade under half — 49 percent).
That is to say: During all these years, while Obama was repeatedly assuring Americans, “If you like your health-insurance plan, you can keep your health-insurance plan,” he actually expected as many as seven out of every ten Americans covered by employer plans to lose their coverage. For small business, he expected at least one out of every two Americans, or as many as four out of every five, to lose their coverage.
Avik’s eagle eye also catches that, even as Obama was spinning on Thursday about how his broken promise affects only the teeny-weeny individual-insurance market, his administration was telling a much different story to state insurance commissioners. In a letter about Obama’s proposed “fix,” the head of the relevant consumer-information office referred to “all individuals and small businesses that received a cancellation or termination notice with respect to coverage” (emphasis added). This, Avik observes, “contradicts assertions from the administration that only people in the individual market — people who shop for coverage on their own — are affected by the wave of Obamacare-related cancellations.”
It gets worse. My friends at the American Freedom Law Center (on whose advisory board I sit) are representing Priests for Life, a group aggrieved by Obamacare’s denial of religious liberty — specifically, the ACA’s mandate that believers, despite their faith-based objections, provide their employees with coverage for the use of abortifacients and contraceptives. On October 17, the Obama Department of Health and Human Services, represented by the Obama Justice Department, submitted a brief to the federal district court in Washington, opposing Priests for Life’s summary judgment motion. On page 27 of its brief, the Justice Department makes the following remarkable assertion:
The [ACA’s] grandfathering provision’s incremental transition does not undermine the government’s interests in a significant way. [Citing, among other sources, the Federal Register.] Even under the grandfathering provision, it is projected that more group health plans will transition to the requirements under the regulations as time goes on. Defendants have estimated that a majority of group health plans will have lost their grandfather status by the end of 2013.
HHS and the Justice Department cite the same section of the Federal Register referred to by John Hinderaker, as well as an annual survey on “Employer Health Benefits” compiled by the Kaiser Family Foundation in 2012.
So, while the president has been telling us that, under the vaunted grandfathering provision, all Americans who like their health-insurance plans will be able to keep them, “period,” his administration has been representing in federal court that most health plans would lose their “grandfather status” by the end of this year. Not just the “5 percent” of individual-market consumers, but close to all consumers — including well over 100 million American workers who get coverage through their jobs — have been expected by the president swiftly to “transition to the requirements under the [Obamacare] regulations.” That is, their health-insurance plans would be eliminated. They would be forced into Obamacare-compliant plans, with all the prohibitive price hikes and coercive mandates that “transition” portends.
Obamacare is a massive fraudulent scheme. A criminal investigation should be opened. Obviously, the Obama Justice Department will not do that, but the House of Representatives should commence hearings into the offenses that have been committed in the president’s deception of the American people.
When Barack Obama isn’t lying to the American people, he is lying to the entire international community, both our allies, and our competitors.
The Geneva negotiations between the so-called P5+1 powers and Iran are a mere “facade,” because the terms of a deal on Iran’s nuclear program have been negotiated in talks between a top adviser to President Barack Obama and a leading Iranian nuclear official that have continued in secret for more than a year, Israeli television reported Sunday.
Despite ostensible full coordination between the US and Israel over strategies for thwarting Iran’s nuclear weapons drive, the administration did not keep Israel fully informed on those talks, Channel 10 news reported, but Jerusalem nonetheless has a pretty clear picture of what has been going on in the secret channel.
White House spokesman Bernadette Meehan was quoted by Haaretz as saying that the report was “absolutely, 100 percent false.”
The report, which relied on unnamed senior Israeli officials, said the US team to the secret talks was led by Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett. Her primary interlocutor, the report said, was the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi. The talks have been taking place in various Gulf states.
In the course of the talks, the report said, the Americans offered the Iranians a series of “confidence-building measures,” which underlined American readiness to conclude a deal and undercut sanctions pressure.
It was the deal discussed in these secret talks, the report said, that the Americans then brought to Geneva earlier this month, where it was largely adopted by the P5+1 nations — the US, Britain, France, Russia, China, plus Germany.
France has indicated that it raised objections to the proposed terms, while US Secretary of State John Kerry said the deal was so “tough” that the Iranians had to return to Tehran to take a decision on whether to sign it. The Geneva talks are set to resume on Wednesday.
This is surely not an example of what any rational individual would describe as “Smart Power”, it’s is arrogant and disrespectful, one can only wonder what the eventual reactions from Moscow, Beijing, Paris, London and Berlin will be.
While we are discussing these recent lies, let us not forget that their is an amazingly long list of previous lies that have never been given their due day in the public discourse, some of which are still simmering on the back burner.
The Department of Justice is seeking to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the House Oversight Committee over Attorney General Eric Holder’s refusal to turn over certain documents related to Operation Fast & Furious and over which the President claimed Executive Privilege:
The Justice Department has asked a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit by the House oversight committee seeking to compel the Obama administration to release more internal records involving the botched gun-trafficking case known as Operation Fast and Furious.
The judiciary should play no role in a dispute like this one between the executive and legislative branches, the department said — one in which the White House has asserted executive privilege over its internal deliberations, and the House of Representatives has voted to hold Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. in contempt for refusing to comply with the committee’s demands.
“Disputes of this sort have arisen regularly since the founding,” the department said in a brief filed Monday night in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. “For just as long, these disputes have been resolved between the political branches through a constitutionally grounded system of negotiation, accommodation, and self-help.”
Referring to the wrangling between Congress and the administration, the agency’s brief says that the process of seeking accommodations “is political, and often disorderly and contentious, and the ultimate resolution often reflects a variety of considerations and compromises on both sides. But it is precisely the inherently political nature of the process of confrontation and resolution that makes it ill-suited for judicial review.”
Congressman Darrell Issa, the Chairman of the Committee has already responded to the motion:
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the chair of the oversight committee who has led the push for documents, said that the response from the DOJ should trouble Americans who don’t believe the White House and federal government are above the law.
“In perpetuating a cover-up, through false and misleading statements that even the Justice Department’s own Inspector General found troubling, the Obama administration argued for months that it did not have to meet its legal obligations to a lawfully issued congressional subpoena,” Issa said in a written statement.
“Now, the Department is advancing arguments – already rejected by the federal judiciary – that our court system does not have jurisdiction to ensure accountability either,” Issa said.
Then there is Benghazi, still unresolved, but everyone knows that the Obamanation Administrations claim, that the attack was caused by an internet video almost nobody on earth had seen was as blatant a lies as ever told.
New classified testimony on Benghazi by five CIA employees shows the administration’s initial narrative about a protest gone awry was “indefensible,” according to a lawmaker who took part in two classified sessions before the House Intelligence Committee.
Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., told Fox News that witnesses described how five mortars rained down on the CIA annex over 90 seconds during the attack — with three direct hits. King argued that the details raise more questions about why the administration initially claimed the attack sprung from a protest over an anti-Islam film – a narrative officials later abandoned.
“It’s indefensible what was said back on September 11, 12, and 13 in 2012, and what the facts really were,” King said. Two other members of the intelligence committee involved in the briefings echoed King’s assessment.
The first two mortars missed, followed by three direct hits on the roof, killing two former Navy SEALs and severely injuring a diplomatic security agent and CIA contractor.
This testimony is seen by lawmakers as more overwhelming evidence that the attack was premeditated terrorism and that these facts were known almost immediately by then-CIA Director David Petraeus – who downplayed the skill and planning needed to use mortars with such accuracy during his Sept. 14, 2012 briefing to Congress.
This week, as the House Intelligence Committee reviews transcripts of the FBI interviews with Benghazi survivors to investigate discrepancies in the timeline, Fox News has learned new details which paint a picture of the State Department personnel at the consulate as “woefully unprepared” to respond to the assault.
Lawmakers were told that when the CIA team arrived from the annex -– about 30 minutes after the attack began — some of the State Department employees were not carrying weapons, and one of the men was not wearing shoes.
If you’re a Democrat, then this incontrovertible and undeniable systemic pattern of lying by the Obamanation Administration is A-Ok, because, well, because you don’t actually have any moral or ethical values, only the utterly insane belief that the End Justifies the Means, and Barack Obama is a fellow democrat. Most American’s do not share your utterly insane value system though, and the evidence of that… Just look around you…