Ouch! This EPIC Goof By The DNC Could Be The Biggest Fail Yet For Hillary’s Clueless Party

Right there, for all to see, prominently displayed on the Democrats’ web page reaching out to “Veterans and Military Families,” was a photo intended to show how the party of Hillary Clinton understands and supports U.S. service men and women. However, as the publication Military Times noted of the image depicting military veterans, the folks at the website Democrats.org got their countries mixed up:

Democrats’ election outreach efforts to veterans may need to start with a refresher course on what U.S. troops look like.

For starters, they don’t wear Polish military uniforms.

Twitter users were quick to pick up on the epic “Polish” goof by the Democrat National Committee (DNC), which many would say shows just how out of touch Democrats are when it comes to recognizing the true nature and value of America’s war fighters.

Image Credit: Twitter/Allison Moore

Image Credit: Twitter/Allison Moore

As the article in Military Times points out, the DNC had originally used a White House photo of President Obama greeting Polish military veterans during a 2011 trip to Warsaw. “The president had been cropped out, but faces of four elderly veterans wearing European-style military uniforms were visible above several paragraphs asserting the party’s ‘commitment to America’s veterans.’ The Polish military’s White Eagle insignia was clear on the headgear of two of the veterans.”

When Military Times alerted the heretofore clueless website managers of their photo faux pas, the image was quickly changed. Social media users, however, were not so quick to stop the snark about the egregious error.

Screen shot 2015-08-28 at 10.25.33 AM

Screen shot 2015-08-28 at 10.25.01 AM

Screen shot 2015-08-28 at 10.24.46 AM

Screen shot 2015-08-28 at 10.23.50 AM

Screen shot 2015-08-28 at 10.22.40 AM

We’ve heard no word yet on whether the head of the DNC, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, intends to push for Polish military vets to receive VA benefits or possibly even have U.S. voting rights…as long as they pledge to support the party’s nominee. (Okay, that’s a bit of Friday humor.)

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

WATCH: Journalist Releases Undercover Sting Video, Warns Hillary – More Is Coming

James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas released undercover video on Wednesday purporting that Hillary Clinton’s campaign is skirting Iowa election law through its voter registration practices.

Time reported the the Clinton campaign went on high alert last week after determining at least two women it believed to be from Project Veritas were seeking to expose illegal activity within the organization. A campaign official expressed confidence the campaign has “upheld the law.” Furthermore, regarding voter registration–the focus of the video–the campaign’s “policy is to register all voters, regardless of their preference in candidates.”

What Project Veritas (PV) discovered, at least in the instructions given by one paid campaign staff member, is that its stated policy is not its practice.

The video opens with an undercover journalist from Project Veritas, who has apparently been posing as a volunteer, being told by an Iowa Hillary Clinton campaign staff member, identified as Sarah Sterner, that she is no longer in any Iowa Hillary offices or events anymore.

“Me?” the “volunteer” (from PV) responds–with a sense of faux disbelief reminiscent of Casablanca’s Captain Renault: “I am shocked — shocked— to find that gambling is going on in here!”  

The video then goes back a day earlier to show staffer Sterner explaining to a PV undercover journalist the campaign’s practice regarding voter registration: first, find out who they support.

“If you open up a conversation as like, ‘Hey, are you registered to vote?’ And they’re, like, ‘no,’ and they want to register, you have to register them,” she says.

“And so that’s why I want to keep our primary focus on, ‘Hey, are you a Hillary supporter?’ And then if not, then great move on, you know?” Sterner concludes.

The narrator, O’Keefe, states that Sterner is explaining how workers can “skirt” Iowa’s election law, citing 39A.2 (1)(b)(5), which states that “A person commits the crime of election misconduct in the first degree if the person willfully … deprives, defrauds, or attempts to deprive or defraud the citizens of this state of a fair and impartially conducted election process.”

A Republican field staff member, who wished to remain anonymous, told Time that approach to training volunteers about voter registration is pretty standard practice among the GOP ranks as well.

O’Keefe gained notoriety in 2007 with undercover videos he created with pro-life activist Lila Rose exposing Planned Parenthood practices. In 2009, undercover videos he released about ACORN generated such public outcry that the organization lost its federal funding.

O’Keefe comes on camera at the end of the Hillary campaign video, claiming: “This is just the tip of the iceberg.”

“In fact, stay tuned, Hillary, because we’re shortly going to release a stunning story of election malfeasance at the highest levels of your campaign,” promises O’Keefe. “Check your email.”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

RNC Just Unveiled This 54 Second Ad Mocking Hillary Clinton. And It’s Hilarious.

The Republican National Committee has released a new ad mocking presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for her ill-conceived, ill-delivered and ill-timed jokes about Emailgate.

The video opens with her smirkily reporting to a group of Iowa Democrats a few weeks ago that she is now on Snapchat. “By the way, you may have seen that I’ve recently launched a Snapchat account. I love it. I love it. Those messages disappear all by themselves.”

Her joke is followed by a Democrat commentator decrying her tactic: “This is awful…This just doesn’t work.”   

Clinton spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri next offers her explanation for her boss’ decision: “That’s the thing, she did not really think it through.” That is not a very encouraging thought for someone who held one of the highest offices in the land and who is now seeking the highest, given her responsibility would be to “think things through” for over 315 million Americans. Watch Palmieri’s explanation below. She squirms and finally begs off from answering the question of whether Clinton directed her server to be wiped (starting at 6:05).

The candidate makes another go at humor when Fox News’ Ed Henry presses the former secretary of state. “Did you wipe the server?” he asks. “What with a cloth or something?” she responds.

As reported by Western Journalism, the embroiling controversy is anything but a laughing matter. Many have noted that Gen. David Petraeus was prosecuted and convicted for a far less infraction of the law regarding the mishandling of classified information than Clinton’s alleged wrongdoing.

Fox News’ Judge Jeanine Pirro has identified at least seven laws that she believes Clinton is likely guilty of breaking, including mishandling of classified material, destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice, and Federal Records Act violations.  

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

WOW! Obama Spokesman Just Revealed The President’s ‘Smartest Decision’ Pick For His Successor

Vice President Joe Biden’s “secret” lunch with Sen. Elizabeth Warren over the weekend stirred all sorts of speculation about a Biden-Warren ticket for 2016, as Western Journalism reported on Monday. Biden’s private discussion with the U.S. senator from Massachusetts — considered by many to be the progressive darling of the far-left of the Democrat Party — supposedly centered on issues important in the current political scene.

But looking at the big picture of Democrat politics in light of Hillary Clinton’s faltering campaign, one cannot overlook the fact that the Biden-Warren get-together came just about the time the Wall Street Journal reported that the vice president is “leaning toward” a 2016 bid for the White House. Biden has reportedly told friends that if he does run for president, he will serve only one term, making an early announcement of his vice-presidential running-mate a logical possibility.

One also cannot overlook the carefully chosen words of White House spokesman Josh Earnest in his daily briefing for reporters on Monday. Noting that President Obama and Vice President Biden had lunched together earlier that day, Earnest didn’t go so far as to say what a senior Democrat told CNN — that Biden had received Obama’s “blessing” to run for the Oval Office. Earnest did, however, all but declare the president’s preference for Biden over Obama’s former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton.

Answering questions from ABC News’ Jon Karl, Earnest said, “The president has indicated his view that the decision that he made, I guess seven years ago now, to add Joe Biden to the ticket as his running mate was the smartest decision he’d ever made in politics.”

Again, while that’s not a direct endorsement of a Joe Biden candidacy in 2016, from the words and demeanor of Obama’s official spokesman it would be reasonable to say that Hillary Clinton would not be Barack Obama’s first choice to carry his banner forward.

“I think you could make the case,” said the White House spokesman, “that there is probably no one in American politics today who has a better understanding of exactly what is required to mount a successful national presidential campaign.” He wasn’t talking about Hillary.

By clicking on the video above, you can watch the very telling segment of the briefing in which Josh Earnest offered high praise from his boss about Biden’s “aptitude for the top job.”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Americans Just Pushed Back In A HUGE Way Against Obama’s Big Plan To Change The World

Iran’s supreme leader is still declaring that the United States is the “enemy:” “We will not allow the Americans to have economic or political influence in our country,” CNS News quotes the ayatollah as saying in a recent speech. “Nor will we allow them to have a political presence and cultural influence in our country.”

Controversial secret “side deals” to the Iran nuclear pact negotiated by the Obama administration are being revealed and are causing great concern among some lawmakers on Capitol Hill. The New York Times reports the disputed contents of those side deals are fueling opposition to the accord that Obama argues must be approved because it will stop Iran from developing the bomb:

To the most strident opponents of President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, the suspicious behavior at a military base about 12 miles southeast of Tehran has become a rallying call to defeat the accord, especially as it now appears that Iranian officials may be allowed to take their own environmental samples at the site and turn them over to inspectors.

And another article in The New York Times — a news analysis published on Monday — points out that Obama’s argument in favor of the nuclear accord has a glaring problem that’s only growing more pronounced:

His problem is that most of the significant constraints on Tehran’s program lapse after 15 years — and, after that, Iran is free to produce uranium on an industrial scale.

As much as Obama and supporters of the Iran nuke deal — now including Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) — try to convince the American people that the pact is a significant step toward promoting peace in the Middle East and national security for the United States, the public remains unconvinced. In fact, voters seem to be wise to what they see as word games and diplomatic double-talk that the president and his pro-deal allies have been using.

The Hill just published the results of a new poll from Quinnipiac University showing that voters in three key swing states oppose the Iran nuclear accord “by margins of more than 2-to-1.”

Florida voters oppose the deal 61 percent to 25 percent. Ohio voters oppose it 58 percent to 24 percent and Pennsylvania voters oppose it 61 percent to 26 percent, according to the poll.

That level of opposition in those three states that are so important in deciding the outcome of the 2016 election would seem to raise a big red flag for Democrat lawmakers still undecided as to how they will cast their votes for the pact on a thumbs-up or thumbs-down basis.

Another poll with clear-cut results — this one a national survey from CNN/ORC released last week — also shows that most Americans want Congress to reject the president’s legacy-building proposal to lift sanctions on Iran and send the Muslim nation billions of dollars in frozen assets.

Reporting on the outcome of the poll — results showing voters disapprove of the deal by a wide margin — The Hill notes that Obama’s overall handling of relations with the mullah-controlled Iranian regime is a huge sore spot for Americans.

Six in 10 Americans, 60 percent, disapprove of how President Obama is handling relations with Iran, up from 48 percent back in April shortly after a framework agreement with Tehran was unveiled.

Congress returns to Washington in September and will vote on whether to accept or reject the pact brokered by the Obama administration. Despite the obvious negative feelings of so many Americans toward the agreement, the president has promised to veto any legislation that would block the Iranian nuke deal from going forward.

Obama, it seems, is willing to defy the will of the public and get his way, no matter the political consequences to others in his own party.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth