The Lawless Regime of an Orwellian Nightmare!

“It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.”

 “The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just around the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know what no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”

― George Orwell, 1984

We have a Federal Constitution in the United States that is supposed to be a Rule of Law concerning the limiting of the powers of Government. Few would doubt that the Constitution has been subverted. We have other laws established for the protection of the American people as well. Laws intended to hold Congress and our government accountable to the people. Consider this law:

18 U.S. Code § 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Following the attack on Benghazi the Administration fabricated a story about a video in the first part of an attempt to willfully conceal the involvement of this administration and the Departments under his Office in the action. On the day of the attack Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a statement confirming that one State official was killed in an attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. Her statement, which MSNBC posted at 10:32 p.m., made reference to the anti-Muslim video.

Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind. (Hillary Clinton)

We were told that the attack came after a demonstration got out of control yet no such evidence of this is in any record except in the words of this administration. At 8:30 p.m. Benghazi time (2:30 Eastern Time) the record shows that U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens steps outside the consulate to say goodbye to a Turkish diplomat. There are no protesters at this time. (“Everything is calm at 8:30,” a State Department official would later say at an Oct. 9 background briefing for reporters. “There’s nothing unusual. There has been nothing unusual during the day at all outside.”).

Four days after the attack Susan Rice, at the time serving as the United States Ambassador to the United Nations, appeared on the talk show circuit and said:

But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy — sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that– in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.

As a result of a filing through the Freedom of Information Act it was disclosed on May 2, 2014:

Two days before Rice’s appearance on the Sunday talk show circuit, Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes sent an email to other administration officials, including White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, with the subject line “PREP CALL with Susan: Saturday at 4:00 pm ET.” Rhodes’ email outlined four “goals” for Rice’s TV appearances. One of the goals: “To underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.” The email contained a mock Q&A session, and the third question asked whether the Benghazi attack was “an intelligence failure.” The answer in the email parroted — nearly word for word — Rice’s talking points when it said: “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US Consulate and subsequently its annex.” The Rhodes email was released April 29 by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group that obtained 41 State Department documents under the Freedom of Information Act. (Source:

Susan Rice has since been named as National Security Advisor in spite of her willful attempts to mislead the public in the events concerning the Attack in Benghazi.

As hearings have proceeded we have learned that Hillary Clinton, the Secretary Of State, concealed her email interaction from the public records through the use of a private email server. This was a willful attempt to conceal the record of these emails from the public scrutiny through the representative government. By refusing to turn over the entire server that contain these emails Hillary Clinton actions have removed these records from scrutiny and has done so willfully while also willfully concealing them.

These actions are clearly in violation of the above stated law and neither Hillary Clinton nor Susan Rice are above the law. Without a prosecution of this law, they will be held unaccountable for violating the law in matters that concern the National Security of the United States thereby impacting the lives of 320 million Americans.

They aren’t alone. Lois Lerner remains un-prosecuted for willfully concealing the actions of the Internal Revenue Service concerning similar attempts to hide the email records of that Agency and alleging the willful destruction of those records. After being told that these email records were completely lost we then learned that many of them were retrievable. As a result of these restored emails we now know that dialogue with Lerner in the emails expressed concern about an investigation by Congress and when she learned that Office Communications Server (OCS) messages were not set to automatically save, Lerner wrote, “Perfect.”   This is also in violation of the above law.

As a result of other filings through the Freedom of Information Act it was discovered that records are being destroyed by the EPA related to The President’s “war on coal” citing the actions of Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy.

We’ve also learned that the Veteran’s Administration destroyed records of Veteran’s seeking care through their agency.

More recently the U.S. Government lied to a federal judge, misrepresented facts and illegally gave 100,081 illegal aliens immigration status despite a pending lawsuit and an injunction. During the heated court hearing Andrew Hanen, a U.S. District Court Judge, said that the apparent violation had made him look like an idiot since he initially believed the U.S. Government.

“When I asked you what would happen and you said nothing I took it to heart. I was made to look like an idiot. I believed your word that nothing would happen.”

During the hearings leading to an injunction handed down by Judge Hanen, attorney’s with the Department of Justice claimed that if an injunction was filed nothing would be done. That wasn’t the case. Angela Colmonero from the Texas Attorney General’s office said.

“The defendant did the exact opposite and gave 100,000 renewals for a term of three years under the expanded DACA. The defendant didn’t inform the court until March 3—15 days after the injunction was filed.”

In November of 2013 John Crudele revealed in a report in the New York Post that a Census employee was caught faking the results of the Census Bureau survey. Julius Buckmon told the reporter in an interview that he was told to make up information by higher-ups at Census. Newsmax revealed that Buckmon was the seventh worker who lost his job as a data collector in 2010 after it was publicly revealed that they had falsified reports. The Post noted that because the Census surveys are scientifically conducted, each interview counts for 5,000 households, and therefore Buckmon’s 100 extra fake interviews monthly would have resulted in falsified information on 500,000 households. Rep. Darrell Issa, the Republican chairman of the Oversight Committee, has asked for documents relating to the Buckmon case, “including e-mails, between and among Census Bureau employees referring or relating to the collection of the Current Population Survey.” But sources told the Post that the Commerce Department and the Census Bureau have been “surprisingly hostile and non-cooperative” in their response. Various New media outlets tried to downplay the falsification of Census Data citing that the Post article was published in 2012 and Buckmon had been fired in 2010 without reporting that data for the census was collected in 2010.

Tom Wheeler, Chairman of the FCC, refused to go before the House Oversight Committee prior to the FCC’s vote on new Internet regulations pertaining to net neutrality. The committee’s chairman, Representative Jason Chaffetz (R., Utah), and Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Fred Upton (R., Mich.) criticized Wheeler and the administration for lacking transparency on the issue. After the release of the 400 pages of regulations it is said that this is a broad attempt by government to control the internet but was a decision that should have been made by Congress, the lawmaking body, not the FCC. In his refusal to testify before the House Oversight Committee Tom Wheeler willfully concealed from the lawmaking body the intent of the FCC regulations.

At the same time this administration has pursued more cases against journalists than any other administrations in their outrageously broad grab of the email and phone records of reporters and editors at the Associated Press and other media outlets. In part, this pursuit of journalists is to intimidate whistleblowers who have leaked information about multibillion-dollar mismanagement fraud, waste and corruption in government. One such case was against whistle-blower Thomas Drake. Drake gave information to a Baltimore Sun reporter who wrote “a prize-winning series of articles for the Sun about financial waste, bureaucratic dysfunction, and dubious legal practices” in the National Security Agency. After years of hounding, the case against Drake fell apart. It was simply the Department of Justice harassment in an attempt to make Drake an example of journalists who question the broad sweeping bipartisan normalization and legitimization of a national-surveillance state. In this new state the data-mining of email correspondence of American citizens with out a warrant has resulted in the N.S.A.’s enormous electronic-storage facilities in Texas and Utah.

This is simply Orwellian in its massive scope and neither party seems to really want to do anything about it except to expand the government’s surveillance authority over U.S. Citizens. In April of 2009, officials at the United States Department of Justice acknowledged that the NSA had engaged in large-scale over-collection of domestic communications in excess of the federal intelligence court’s authority.

Documents leaked to the media in June 2013 described PRISM, a national security electronic surveillance program operated by the NSA, as enabling in-depth surveillance on live internet communications and stored information. Participants in the PRISM program including Microsoft in 2007, Yahoo! in 2008, Google in 2009, Facebook in 2009, Paltalk in 2009, YouTube in 2010, AOL in 2011, Skype in 2011 and Apple in 2012. In a briefing document reviewed by The Washington Post it was indicated that “98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google and Microsoft”. Considering the role that Data-mining plays in the advancement of Common-Core education and one of its largest proponents is Bill Gates, new questions about this Data-mining should be brought into this equation.

It also begs the question that when Government officials willfully withhold emails from Congress, shouldn’t that information be available through other sources or is Data-mining of Government officials immune? The conspirator mindset can easily go to the conclusion that all these hearings and breaking stories about the withholding of information from the American public in instances where Government Officials have broken the law are nothing more than a dog and pony show…a distraction for the American people as the government ramps up surveillance on those people.

Republican Senator Lindsay Graham, during a recent visit to Concord, New Hampshire stated:

And here’s the first thing I would do if I were president of the United States. I wouldn’t let Congress leave town until we fix this. I would literally use the military to keep them in if I had to. We’re not leaving town until we restore these defense cuts. We are not leaving town until we restore the intel cuts.  

The expansion of powers to government through section 1031 of the NDAA does apply to American citizens in the arrest and unlimited detention without warrant or due process. Senator Graham made that clear on the Senate floor saying: “1031, the statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the homeland.”

The argument made by legislators is that this only involves Americans suspected of acts of terrorism against the United States but those were the same charges advances about whistle-blower Thomas Drake which was proven in a court of law to be unfounded. If this is pursued, how would the American people know if the individuals arrested were actually guilty of terrorism?  Without due process the government can accuse anyone without having to provide evidence of their claim putting us in a place similar to the pre-revolutionary Writs Of Assistance that many belief gave birth to the American Revolution.   Are we simply supposed to take their word for it?

Certainly our government needs to have certain powers in the tracking of known and actual terrorist activity in our Country but we are talking about a government that has repeatedly lied to us about terrorist threats; we are talking about a president who is reluctant to call any act of terrorism conducted by a Muslim affiliated group an act of terrorism; we are talking about an Administration and Department Of Justice who willfully lied to the American People about the events in Ferguson that inflamed race riots; we are talking about a government involved in arming hostile drug cartels that have infiltrated America Cities and a Government that praised the Arab Spring that empowered ISIS.

The Federal Government is holding American citizens to a standard they are not willing to apply to themselves. Laws intended to hold the Federal Government accountable to the people are blatantly ignored and journalists who attempt to expose the actions are being intimidated by the Government as well as by members of their own profession. Sharyl Attkisson, author and former investigative correspondent in the Washington bureau for CBS News, alleges in her book Stonewalled: One Reporter’s Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington (Harpers) of the medias protection of the Obama administration by not giving enough coverage to such stories as the 2012 Benghazi attack and slow initial enrollments under Obamacare. Atkisson alleges that her personal and work computers had been “compromised” for more than two years. Attkisson stated that CBS News had investigated and found evidence of multiple unauthorized accesses by a third parties in late 2012 yet CBS did little to defend their reporter.

“Sometimes they threaten you with something – something you can’t stand up to, can’t even think about. And then you say, “Don’t do it to me, do it to somebody else, do it to So-and-so.” And perhaps you might pretend, afterwards, that it was only a trick and that you just said it to make them stop and didn’t mean it. But that isn’t true. At the time when it happens you do mean it. You think there’s no other way of saving yourself, and you’re quite ready to save yourself that way. You WANT it to happen to the other person. You don’t give a damn what they suffer. All you care is yourself.”

― George Orwell, 1984

The path we are on is a very dangerous path

 “In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?”

― George Orwell, 1984



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s