Why?

V3CBSBPTS8N6

Sometimes one has to listen closely to what people say verbally and non-verbally. Many times the messages are contradictory as the verbal communication does not match the non-verbal communication. Consequently, wise people look at both especially when the message is important.Now we find out that the New York Times was talking to the attackers on the ground in Benghazi as reported in the New York Times by David Kirkpatrick. Now I would like to believe the New York Times. Why would anyone especially a reporter twist a story? Why would the New York Times with all their prestige and reputation on the line print an article from one of their reporters without first making sure all the facts as reported in their article is accurate but more importantly, true? Every journalism student as well as journalism professional with integrity knows this fact. Consequently, one has to wonder why would the New York Times publish this story about a U.S. ambassador that was killed in Libya without taking proper care that the story in fact could withstand scrutiny?

Well, as mentioned earlier and years ago on this blog, it seems that the press has changed during the Obama administration. It seems that stories are just put out there in print that in fact cannot withstand scrutiny. For example, Director of National Intelligence,James Clapper, answered a Senate selected Congressional Committee question posed on March 12, 2012 by Senator Ron Wyden about the NSA collecting data and eavesdropping on millions of Americans and answered,

"Those who would want to weave the story that we have millions or hundreds of millions of dossiers on people, is absolutely false…From my perspective, this is absolute nonsense."

Senator Wydon continued and further asked the Director of National Intelligence, Mr. Clapper,

"Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?" He,[Mr. Clapper] responded, "No, sir." Wyden asked "It does not?" and Clapper said "Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly."

On June 6, 2013 Director Clapper released a statement admitting the NSA collects telephony metadata on millions of Americans telephone calls. Then, On July 1, 2013, Clapper issued an apology, saying that "My response was clearly erroneous – for which I apologize."

To most people that would be considered inaccurate especially after it was reported and confirmed that in fact the NSA was indeed violating American citizens privacy and indeed collecting their emails as well as phone conversations and storing them digitally. My point is not the fact that lying occurs and that the Director of Intelligence lied to a U.S. Senator under oath as part of a select Senate Congressional Committee. The important question as with the New York Times article is why?

Could it be that there is a huge campaign to mislead many Americans as to what is occurring to their country? We have truths twisted by Jay Carney, White House spokesperson for the Obama administration. Why would he mislead the public? If one thinks about it, why is such a huge effort being placed on making Americans think and believe that everything is going well with the United States today? Well, think about it. If one wanted to change the country even while violating the principles of our founding fathers, the writers of our U.S. Constitution, one would need to keep the masses of Americans believing everything in the country is all right. The last thing a change agent wants is resistance to the change they deem proper for the country even if that change violates the principles established in the U.S. Constitution. And, think for a moment, that most Americans are too busy working to support their families so the information they receive about their country is controlled by the free press. So, if the free press, for whatever reasons, decides to support the change agent and just put up stories for Americans to read with the belief that the stories are true, well you can figure out the rest.

Consequently, if nothing nefarious is going on, then all questions are encouraged and are supported to get to the truth. However, the Obama administration ran on the premise of transparency during the President's first term. That was the verbal message if you remember what I mentioned at the beginning of this piece. But, if anyone goes back and studies the articles and sound bites of our President and the people he designated to answer questions, what do you think you find? Did you know that the administration wants to now control the pictures that come out of the White House which is something that was never controlled by the White House? Again, why?

If there is nothing to hide on anyone's part, then why did the President never get to the bottom of the story about FAST and FURIOUS, where U.S. border patrol agent Brian Terry was killed by criminals working for two FBI operatives? In fact, it was found that that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was actively involved in the cover-up of this story reported back in the press on 10/3/2012. Why did the free press never re-visit what happened there? Why did President Obama invoke executive privilege for the first time in his presidency to not release records or documents related to the Fast and Furious Operation and the cover-up by the Attorney General, Eric Holder? After Mr. Obama exercised executive privilege over the release of Department of Justice documents related to Fast and Furious and Eric Holder, Congress held Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States, in contempt of Congress on June 28, 2012.(For those unfamiliar with executive privilege: it is the power of the President of the United States to resist subpoenas of the legislative and judicial branches of government).

So, the President said he wanted this to be a transparent administration verbally when he first was campaigning for the U.S. Presidency but his actions especially exerting executive privilege send a very contradictory message. The question we must all ask as patriotic American citizens is,
why are questions regarding the truth from this administration not forth coming from the President or his administration?

By the way, on November 14, 2013 articles of impeachment were filed against the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder, by Congress for his role in Operation Fast and Furious and other scandals involving President Obama's administration: Specifically,for those readers who want the reference, it is House Resolution 411 which in Article I specifies:

Eric H. Holder, Jr., while Attorney General of the
6 United States, engaged in a pattern of conduct incompat-
7 ible with the trust and confidence placed in him in that
8 position by refusing to comply with a subpoena issued by
9 the House Committee on Oversight and Government Re-
10 form on October 12, 2011, in connection with a legitimate
11 Congressional investigation into Operation Fast and Furi-
12 ous by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms that
13 put thousands of illegally purchased weapons into the
14 hands of cartel leaders, ultimately resulting in the death
15 of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry on December
16 14, 2010.
17 Wherefore, Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of
18 the United States, is guilty of high crimes and mis-
19 demeanors and should be removed from office and dis-
20 qualified to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or
21 profit under the United States.

Why did the free press let the story go on the IRS targeting Tea Party groups after the White House denied any involvement in that travesty? Why was Lois Lerner who knew about the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups allowed to retire with no consequences? Why? In fact, why did the Attorney General, Eric Holder, not prosecute the IRS non-authorized tax records' disclosures?
The Article III of impeachment for the Attorney General filed by Congress on November 14, 2013 further states:

ARTICLE III
9 Eric H. Holder, Jr., while Attorney General of the
10 United States, has failed his oath of office by refusing to
11 prosecute individuals involved in the Internal Revenue
12 Service scandal of unauthorized disclosure of tax records
13 belonging to political donors.
14 Wherefore, Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of
15 the United States, is guilty of high crimes and mis-
16 demeanors and should be removed from office and dis-
17 qualified to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or
18 profit under the United States.

< Why, in fact, does it seem that a less than candid Attorney General, holds the highest law enforcement position in the country,if the Article IV of the impeachment article filed by Congress on Nov. 14, 2013 is true, and it states:

And, with respect to the wire-tapping of Associated Press writers by the Department of Justice and their treatment of U.S. reporter James Rosen, Article V of the impeachment article filed by Congress with repect to the Attorney General, Eric Holder, states:

ARTICLE IV
20 Eric H. Holder, Jr., while Attorney General of the
21 United States, testified under oath before Congress on
22 May 15, 2013, that he was neither involved in nor had
23 heard of a potential prosecution of the press. However
24 three days later, the Department of Justice released docu-
25 ments naming journalist James Rosen as a co-conspirator
26 in an alleged violation of the Espionage Act. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, confirmed
2 to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Rep-
3 resentatives in a letter dated June 19, 2013, that he ap-
4 proved of a search warrant on James Rosen.
5 Wherefore, Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of
6 the United States, is guilty of high crimes and mis-
7 demeanors and should be removed from office and dis-
8 qualified to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or
9 profit under the United States.

Again, the most pressing question is why? Why is this Attorney General good for the United States of America if these articles filed by Congress are true? Aren't lawyers held to a higher standard of following the law? Is this Attorney General supposed to be a role model for our children and Americans who follow and obey the law daily?

Why is Mr. Holder the Attorney General of the United States if all of this is true? And, Mr. Obama says the country is doing well? It is? Why is it doing so well with this Attorney General again? Does not make sense, or does it?

Why are we supposed to believe anything from the administration if all of the above is true?
And, if all of the above is true, are we supposed to believe that everything is going well in the United States of America, land of the free and home of the brave?


Do the actions of the administration support the verbal communication the administration puts out there?

And, how many hard-working American citizens have the time and energy to keep asking questions and keep trying to find out the truth when the administration hopes that most Americans will tire of this exercise and everything will go away. This seems to be the hope of many. Yet, isn't that unpatriotic, dishonest, and morally wrong?
Fooling the American Public, or maybe not?

Again, why are we the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave?