Watch: Sarah Palin Just Laid The Smack Down On Eric Holder With This Epic Rant

shutterstock_182562686

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin dedicated much of her speech at the recent Western Conservative Summit to Attorney General Eric Holder, who used his position to lambaste Palin during an interview last week.

“I don’t need a lecture from Eric Holder,” she said, “a guy – get this – so incompetent that he denied voter fraud existed even after someone claimed that they were Eric Holder and they got his ballot and they voted in D.C.!”

She went on to point out that he is one of a very few presidential cabinet members in American history to have been found in contempt of Congress.

“If he wants to weigh in,” Palin suggested, “maybe he can tell his boss [to] get out of the bubble, go to those border towns, working class communities, see the consequences of deliberately not enforcing the law.”

Holder’s common refrain, she noted, is to label his political adversaries as racists, which she called “a disgusting, false charge.”

According to Palin, the only reason the administration uses such divisive language is to end a debate it would otherwise lose on merit.

“He needs to use his noggin,” she said of Holder, “and answer what’s to account then for the anti-Obama policy protests going on today in black communities and Hispanic circles and on reservations and in my own home!”

Photo credit: Everett Collection / Shutterstock.com

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

In Just One Terrible Night, This Guy’s Views On Gun Control Were Changed Forever

duffy

James Dittrich was immediately thrust into a terrifying situation when a pair of thugs followed him home, robbed him, and forced him into his own apartment at gunpoint. The commotion woke his sleeping fiancé, Meredith Duffy, who was then sexually assaulted by the armed intruders.

“He just grabbed the back of my shirt, pulled me off of the bed, put the gun back on me, said ‘Get your purse,’” she recalled. “Then he told me, ‘Just dump it out.’ My phone fell face down on the couch and I remember thinking, ‘There’s my phone. It’s right there.’”

A quick-thinking Dittrich saw an opening to grab the burglar’s gun.

“I couldn’t wrestle it free,” he said, “but I knew, with both hands on it, I had control of it and that was the opportunity that she needed to call. And I just, I really just hoped I could keep control of it for her to make that call.”

As Duffy called for help, she was forced to witness Dittrich withstand a brutal beating that left his face battered and broken.

“And the one kept yelling, ‘Shoot him, shoot him, shoot him,’” she said.

Though the intruders ultimately fled the scene before killing either of the victims, Dittrich and Duffy are left with the harrowing memories of that tragic day. The two burglars remain at large.

“You’re always looking around,” Dittrich explained. “You see somebody who looks like they remind you of the people and you just immediately get a sense of dread.”

Following the incident, the couple moved from East Orange, N.J., to their hometown in Ohio.

Not only did the vicious attack cause them to rethink their living situation; it also led to an about face regarding gun control.

“I didn’t want a gun,” Dittrich said of his opinion prior to the burglary. “I specifically didn’t want one.”

After realizing how helpless he was without some means of protection, however, he left his anti-gun philosophy behind.

Dittrich concluded that he was forced to recognize that the police are not going to be immediately available to protect his family in the face of such a threat.

“They can respond,” he reasoned; “and they can protect you once they get there. But, you’re on your own.”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Here’s How Much Money Hillary Clinton Has Made Since Leaving The State Department

Photo credit: Frederic Legrand / Shutterstock.com

According to Bloomberg, Hillary Clinton has made a whopping twelve million dollars since she left the Department of State 16 months ago. This comes from three primary sources: her latest memoir, her speeches, and her appearances for companies.

Commenting on her success on the Daily Show, Clinton said:

Bill and I have worked really hard and we’ve been successful. We believed we could pretty much make our way up the ladder. Now, I think a lot of young people don’t believe that anymore.

Has her financial success, like Mitt Romney’s, come at a political cost? Given that Clinton has received millions from financial firms, liberal Robert Reich raises the question:

The real question behind the question is: Are you going to be fighting for average working people? It’s doubly important for her to show that even though she may take money from Wall Street, she won’t allow Wall Street to dictate what she says or the policies she will advocate.

Hillary Clinton brushed off Romney comparisons in an interview with PBS last month, labeling them a “false equivalency.” She stated:

I’m fully comfortable with who I am, what I stand for and what I’ve always stood for.

How does her income over the last sixteen months break down according to Bloomberg? She made at least $6 million on her latest memoir Hard Choices and has made at least $200,000 per speech for at least 27 speeches.

What do you think? Has Hillary Clinton’s massive income over the last 16  months disqualified her from the 2016 Democratic Presidential nomination?

Follow F. Peter Brown on Twitter. 

Photo credit: Frederic Legrand / Shutterstock.com

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Hamas Could Be The Least Of Israel’s Worries Thanks To Obama

Photo credit: Barack Obama (Flickr)

Everyone knew this was going to happen: the Obama administration extended its negotiations with Iran over their nuclear weapons capability and released another $2.8 billion of frozen Iranian assets, granting the Iranian government further economic relief while they continue their development of weapons of mass destruction.

To borrow a phrase from our Dear Leader, let’s be clear.  This is the same regime that has spewed from multiple layers of government, from the Supreme Ayatollah on down, the meme that the Jewish State should be destroyed as late as 2013. As recent as May of this year, the Iranian Supreme Leader stated in front of the Iranian parliament that Iran would fight jihad until America and Israel are no more.

Why is it that the Obama administration refuses to enforce the first deal Iran signed with the P5+1 powers but continues to allow, delay, and give the Iranians the time they need to successfully develop the bomb?

I wrote a thriller novel called Sugar last year that outlined my concerns on American policy in the Middle East and the array of threats against Israel.  Unfortunately, my predictions are coming true.

It is obvious Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapon and are very close to doing so.  It is also obvious to the world and most Congressional leaders that Iran is toying with the Obama administration, requesting delay after delay until they complete the development and testing process to field a WMD.  Even former members of the Obama administration involved in the process of preventing Iran from going nuclear have publicly disagreed with the president over his handling of this issue and have called for crippling sanctions against Iran. Instead, this administration seems to want to allow Iran to get the bomb.

What would be the consequences of such a development? Israel’s existence would be immediately, continually, and forever threatened. Are we willing to write off our only democratic ally in the Middle East? Oil supplies in the Persian Gulf would be threatened.

A senior military officer in Iran only recently stated that Iran had developed the capability to destroy the U.S. Navy. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz would have long term economic consequences for the world as the price of crude oil would skyrocket and be sustained for the long term at high levels. Iran would also be emboldened to expand an empire across the Middle East and establish a Shia caliphate to restore the Persian empire.  This could lead to a large-scale conflict between the new Sunni Islamic State and Iran, which could be devastating in its brutality and negative consequences for the free world.

Or what if ISIS and Iran decided to solve their differences and join forces to target Israel and the United States?  In any scenario, the threat to our country and our allies is significant.  We cannot afford to allow Iran to join the nuclear club.

If only our Dear Leader would see things in the same light; but alas, he doesn’t.  Obama and Kerry think we can contain Iran as we did the Soviet Union.  The Soviet Union may have been an evil empire; but at the end of the day, they were rational. Iran is not. That is the difference, and that is why Iran can’t be contained.

This is also why conservatives MUST win the Senate in November to bypass this treasonous administration and insert a viable foreign policy that increases sanctions on Iran to prevent the Islamic state from going nuclear.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by WesternJournalism.com.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Watch: If Judge Jeanine’s Shocking Allegations Are True, Obama Could Be In Big Trouble

judge

Judge Jeanine Pirro said in her opening statement on her Sunday show that Obama has known about this surge of immigrants from Central America for at least two years and has been covering it up from Congress and the American people.

The Judge said that “The White House was involved two years ago in efforts to care for these kids when they negotiated the temporary shelter at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas.  So why, you say, would the Obama administration not prepare and plan and warn us two years ago? Why?”

Judge Jeanine then runs a clip of herself from a July 12th show predicting her theory that “Obama is intentionally using the immigration crisis as an excuse to change the demographics and ultimately the electorate of this nation.”

She added to that theory, saying that this was a “calculated decision” by the White House not to tell the public or to actually protect our borders.  She said, “If the president were to tell us this surge was coming, indeed already started, it would be far more difficult to pass comprehensive immigration reform, wouldn’t it?”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom