Pat Robertson Just Said 4 Words To Trump’s Face That Has Shocked Many Christians

Christian media leader Pat Robertson, who 28 years ago ran for the White House in his bid to reform America, had a message Wednesday for the 2016 Republican presidential candidate whose campaign has set political fires ablaze across America.

“You inspire us all,” Robertson told Donald Trump during an appearance at Regent University in Virginia.

During his appearance, Trump cited his book “The Art of the Deal,” as a great book, but told his Christian audience that the greatest book is the Bible.

“Kerry did not read the Art of the Deal. Probably not the Bible, either,” Trump said during a conversation about Secretary of State John Kerry.

Robertson asked Trump what criteria he would use in nominating a successor for Justice Antonin Scalia.

Pro-life,” Trump replied. “We want– It starts with that, starts with it. A very conservative, a very, very smart, I mean like Judge (Antonin) Scalia would be a perfect. He was a perfect representative.”

“I’ve always said that Justice (Clarence) Thomas doesn’t get enough credit. He is a wonderful man, a wonderful guy and I’ve always said Judge (Samuel) Alito is a terrific guy. So, in that realm is what we’re talking about for me,” Trump said.

Trump also discussed Middle East affairs.

“I didn’t want to go into Iraq; it was one of the worst decisions ever made,” Trump said. “We lost $2 trillion, thousands and thousands of lives — thousands of lives. We have wounded warriors who I love all over the place, and what happens? Iran is now taking over Iraq.”

“When you think of how Iran is doing lately, right? Between the Iran deal, we give them $150 billion — we got nothing for it,” he said. “We should have gotten our prisoners back long before we started negotiating…(Secretary John) Kerry – this is the worst negotiator I think I’ve ever seen.”

Trump also took a jab at Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

“Boy, did you ever see anybody so nice to the president, though? ‘Oh, the president is wonderful,’ she says. ‘Oh, the president, he’s great … You know why she’s doing that, right? You know why? I know why. Boy, oh boy, she’s become like a marshmallow.”

Trump said the president should bring government to a consensus on issues and move forward, something President Obama has been unable to do.

“You’re supposed to get the congressmen in, the senators in; you’re supposed to make deals,” he told Robertson. “I deal in politics in other countries ’cause we’re building all over the world. And we have jobs going up all over the world — a lot of jobs. But I have never seen division like you have now.”

“The country is so divided, whether it’s African American, white, congressman, Democrat, Republican. I mean it’s just like we have a whole divided country. I’ve never seen anything like it,” he said. “But we used to see, and I used to be part of Democrats and Republicans having dinners together with their families and their wives, and it was a nice thing. There’d be combat the next day, but there would be — they’d get along — and they’d get things done.”

Do you support Donald Trump? Like the page:

“So today we have a president that can’t get anything done, and he signs executive orders,” said Trump, who vowed to abolish Obama’s executive orders if elected.

h/t: TheBlaze

When Is A Lame Duck So Lame That It Finally Stops Quacking?

At what point during his administration does a duck become lame?

While meeting in the Oval Office Wednesday for a photo op with Jordan’s King Abdullah, President Obama addressed that issue by taking a question concerning the nomination of a new Supreme Court justice before he leaves office. He spent nine luxurious minutes answering, taking yet another opportunity to lecture us at length on the Constitution and show us how he stands up for it every time that doing so will suit his political purposes. Lame duck or no, there was more quacking going on than in any given chapter of George Orwell’s Animal Farm.

In true Alinsky-like form, Obama pointed his finger squarely at Republicans for causing further deterioration in his ability to make judicial appointments. It’s all their fault that such appointments become “simply an extension of our polarized politics.” He then tied this to the loss of credibility of the Court itself.

Who knew that “GOP” really stands for “Grand Old Polarizers”? As if the most polarizing President in history — I’d be happy to make that case — had nothing to do with this political reality.

Without mentioning it specifically (a smart move), he alluded to Joe Biden’s message to then-President George H. W. Bush in 1992, etched into history on videotape, that a nominee should not be put forward during an active Presidential campaign. Biden made it clear that the Senate Judiciary Committee “should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings until after the political season is over.” Of course, he anticipated criticism over such a move — the accusation that they were just trying to “save a seat” for the Democrats. “But that would not be our intention,” he insisted.

I’ll pause for a moment while you double over laughing and dab your crying eyes.

Sometimes in our political discourse, there’s an irony so rich, a humor so intense, that it actually brings a bit of entertainment value to the passing parade of idiocy and frustration. But Obama knows good and well that this is much more than a show or a political game. He knows everything that’s at stake in his waning months in office, and he’ll pound like mad to carve his ideology into stone before heading off to his Hawaiian lair. Regardless of tradition, or the Constitution, or how the American people want to live their lives, the duck is lame when he says it is. As for Biden’s words from 1992, Obama had this to say:

“Senators say stuff all the time.”

So do lame duck Presidents, but that doesn’t mean we have to act on it.

If President Obama Is Successful In Closing GITMO, It Would Be A Win For Terrorists

Video Transcript:

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters had a lot to say about Obama’s proposal to close Guantanamo Bay.

PETERS: I think what troubles me most though about the President’s remarks yesterday, Martha, is he’s portraying closing Guantanamo as some sort of moral victory that will make the world and even the terrorists respect our values. On the contrary – close Guantanamo and the terrorists will present it, rightfully, as a huge victory over the United States. That they forced us to close Guantanamo. He is desperate to cling to this one part of his legacy, that 2008 campaign promise … he appears to have learned almost nothing in seven years.

As President Obama awaits a congressional decision, House Speaker Paul Ryan struck down the proposal.

RYAN: [President Obama] can try. He has no authority to do so.

REPORTER: He argues to the contrary.

RYAN: I think 370 House members voted for the [National Defense Authorization Act], 91 senators voted for the NDAA. We have veto override vote on this. We are making legal preparations if the president tries to break the law. And what boggles my mind is that the president is contemplating directing the military to knowingly break the law. Our law is really clear and, by the way, the Democrats wrote this law when they were in the majority, when they ran Congress – which is these detainees cannot come to American soil. So if the president proceeds with knowingly breaking the law and asking the military to break the law, he will be met with fierce bipartisan opposition here in Congress.

Report: Here’s Who Obama Is Considering To Replace Scalia – It’s NOT Who You’d Think

Following U.S. Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia’s sudden death earlier this month, controversy arose regarding whether President Barack Obama or his successor would nominate the conservative jurist’s replacement. Despite Republican opposition, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s assertion that there will be no hearings on the matter until the next administration, Obama has remained resolute in his intention to select the next high court judge.

Asked if he would look for a “moderate” nominee in an effort to achieve bipartisan support, Obama reportedly rejected the idea.

According to recent reports, however, Obama is not only considering a moderate, but a moderate Republican to fill Scalia’s vacant seat. Citing information leaked from a source close the the administration, the Washington Post named Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval as the likely nominee.

Some pundits on the right are skeptical.

Prior to becoming Nevada’s governor in 2011, Sandoval served as federal judge, making him the first Latino to hold statewide elected office in the state.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest acknowledged the rumors on Wednesday, though he shed no light on their veracity. Instead, he reiterated the qualities he will be looking for in a nominee.

“The president’s focused on criteria that, frankly, is more important,” Earnest said, “and that is that individual’s qualifications, and their experience and their view of the law. That will take precedence over any sort of political consideration.”

What Obama Administration Wants To Do To Upcoming Presidential Election Could Change EVERYTHING

The Obama Administration has sided with liberal groups in a lawsuit filed against the non-partisan Election Assistance Agency (EAC), seeking to block it from complying with state voter verification laws. Vote integrity advocates charge this is an effort to ensure that non-citizens vote.

The League of Women Voters and the NAACP filed the suit on Feb. 12, which seeks to block the EAC from moving forward with requests from Alabama, Georgia and Kansas to require documentary proof of citizenship on federal mail-in voter registration forms.

The Heritage Foundation’s Hans A. von Spakovsky, writing for National Review, reports: “Under federal law, the EAC is responsible for designing the federal voter-registration form required by the National Voter Registration Act, or Motor Voter, as it is commonly called. While states must register voters who use the federal form, states can ask the EAC to include instructions with the federal form about additional state registration requirements. Some states are now requiring satisfactory proof of citizenship to ensure that only citizens register to vote.”

“Voters should not have to face an obstacle course to participate and vote,” said Elisabeth MacNamara, president of the League of Women Voters of the U.S. “The recent decision by EAC Executive Director Brian Newby is simply contrary to federal law and we expect it to be overturned.”

Source inside the Justice Department informed von Spakovsky that it was DOJ’s Voting Rights Section which actually wrote a denial letter to the states in question for the supposedly independent EAC, explaining why the agency was reversing an earlier decision permitting them to include voter eligibility requirements on the federal form. “Allowing lawyers for the highly partisan Voting Section to write agency policy obliterates all semblance of independence and bipartisan balance,” writes von Spakovsky. 

This is the same Voting Rights Section, which refused to prosecute the New Black Panther Party for physically intimidating voters at a polling place (caught on video) in Philadelphia in 2008 in the group’s push to get Barack Obama elected. 

Radio talk show host Frank Gaffney asked von Spakovsky on his program on Monday, “Would it be fair to say … that the government, starting with Barack Obama, actually wants noncitizens to vote and is doing its level best to bring more of them here, among other reasons, for that purpose?”

“Oh, I think so,” von Spakovsky responded, “because, look, this isn’t the only instance of this. A few years ago when Florida started trying to clear noncitizens off their voter registration rolls, and they found thousands of them, this very same Justice Department under Eric Holder actually went to court to try to stop them from doing that, making the absurd claim that it violated the National Voter Registration Act … So they actually went to court to try to stop them from taking noncitizens off the voter rolls.”

True the Vote, the non-partisan voter integrity group, agrees with von Spakovsky’s assessment. “In advance of the 2016 election, the Obama Administration and its radicalized Department of Justice have launched a full scale effort to embolden leftist political allies and destroy election integrity,” the organization’s founder Catherine Engelbrecht said. “Today’s message is clear: any state or federal agency that works to prevent non-U.S. citizens from registering to vote in 2016 will witness the full wrath — lawful or not — of the Department of Justice.”