Between Congressional investigations into what we now know was an obvious Benghazi rape/murder cover-up of a US ambassador the State Dept left out in the cold to be slaughtered (but don’t worry; Valerie Jarrett is vigorously defended) and the breaking foreign donations scandal that has magically helped Obama close the money gap with Romney (well, that and the “National Yard Sale Day for Obama,” as well as the wedding registries for Obama, and the Bar-Mitzvah donations to Obama, etc), do we really even have time for, say, Fast and Furious (more Americans and Mexicans dead), or this newest one: “Bombshell: Obama.com owned by Bundler in Shanghai with Business Ties to Chinese Government”:
In an explosive report set to send shockwaves through official Washington, the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) released a 108-page GAI investigation into the threat of foreign and fraudulent Internet campaign donations in U.S. federal elections (visit campaignfundingrisks.com to download the full report).
Breitbart News obtained an advance copy of the bombshell report which reveals that the Obama.com website is not owned by the president’s campaign but rather by Obama bundler Robert Roche, a U.S. citizen living in Shanghai, China. Roche is the chairman of a Chinese infomercial company, Acorn International, with ties to state-controlled banks that allow it to “gain revenue through credit card transactions with Chinese banks.”
There’s more.
The unusual Obama.com website redirects traffic directly to a donation page on the Obama campaign’s official website, my.barackobama.com, which does not require donors to enter their credit card security code (known as the CVV code), thereby increasing the likelihood of foreign or fraudulent donations. The website is managed by a small web development firm, Wicked Global, in Maine. One of Wicked Global’s employees, Greg Dorr, lists on his LinkedIn page his additional employment with Peace Action Maine and Maine Voices for Palestinian Rights. According to the GAI report, 68 percent of all Internet traffic to Obama.com comes from foreign visitors.
And still more.
In 2011, Mr. Roche obtained one of the most sought-after pieces of real estate in Washington, DC: a seat at the head table for President Obama’s State Dinner for Chinese President Hu Jintao. How Roche—a man whose infomercial company hawks fitness equipment, cell phones, and breast enhancement products—landed a seat alongside Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former President Bill Clinton, Sen. John Kerry, former President Jimmy Carter, and Chinese President Hu Jintao remains unclear.
Since 2009, White House Visitor Logs list the name Robert Roche at least 19 times, despite the fact Mr. Roche’s primary residence is in China.
Mr. Roche, who is originally from Chicago, is a co-chair of the Technology Initiative for the Obama campaign.
According to Acorn International’s prospectus, the success of Mr. Roche’s company hinges on maintaining access to state-run media and “preferential tax treatments and subsidies” doled out by the People’s Republic of China (PRC):
Our business depends on our access to TV media time to market our products and services in China….PRC law is vague and is subject to discretionary interpretation and enforcement by PRC authorities…Loss of these preferential tax treatments and subsidies could have material and adverse effects on our results of operations and financial conditions.
In addition to the Obama.com redirect revelation, the Government Accountability Institute report—America the Vulnerable: Are Foreign And Fraudulent Online Contributions Influencing U.S. Elections?—exposes myriad gaping online security holes that stand to threaten the integrity of House, Senate, and presidential elections.
Sounds huge and scary and like, a game changer, doesn’t it?
Until we remember: Bain Capital. Big Banking. And mysterious Cayman Island accounts.
Plus, Cheney. And American voters who assume now that just about everything reported to them is either a lie or some sort of manipulative hyperbole.
Not sure how long the mainstream press can sit and spin like it has been — and that appears to be its job of late; they’ve become adept at figuring out ways to spin news the sheer momentum of which forces them to “cover” it — but in this case, I’d look for an attempt to draw equivalencies between legal foreign investments and offshore accounts (capitalism!) and the kind of transnational progressive gambit we’re seeing Obama undertake, where our elections are being directed by monies from foreign donors, many of whom, it would appear, have an interest in the continuation of Obama’s globalist agenda.
It takes money to tear down a superpower and replace it’s strength with the accumulated strength of a scheming cabal of failing foreign progressive governments and international business interests looking to redefine traditional markets, then position themselves for maximum advantage.
To them, this investment in the attempted coup of the US is a no brainer.
For us, this is something that should have been pursued in 2008; dismissive sneers from the left at “conspiracy” mongers should never have been able to frighten off a thorough accounting of the Obama money flow.
(h/t JHo)
Hmm…2008. Nope. It’s kinda fuzzy now but I do vaguely recall something about . . . a. . . . uh. . . Halliburton?
Journalistic spin — just as with a gyroscope — is the means whereby such folk maintain their orientation. So less dizzy they’d say (oddly enough), rather than more. Yet they’ll still insist that there are no truths, no ‘absolutes’ by which to orient — so their constant leftward angular momentum, they’ll have us think, is a happy accident: happier still that they align with Barack Obama who alone can save us all.
From our mistaken selves.
From our
mistakenraaaaacist selves.FTFY.
Benghazi, you say? Tapper drops the hammer: ABC Obtains Memo Revealing Obama Administration Rejected Benghazi Security Warnings
Guess what! They lied. Sharyl Attkisson follows up with a groin strike.
It’s staring to look like Baracky’s media is breaking up with him.
All these things are only scandals if the mainstream media lets them be scandals. They won’t.
Seriously, if deliberately shipping weapons to Mexican drug cartels so they can be recovered after they’ve been used to commit mass murder is not a scandal, then it’s not likely a corrupt fundrasing scandal is going to break through.
If what happened to Ambassador Stevens is not a scandal, then an obscure discussion about how Obama doesn’t require CVV’s for credit card donations is probably not going to be the tipping point.
The only way any Obama scandal will ever get mentioned is if the media can use it as a lead-in to accuse Romney of something.
The media is the gatekeeper. Until the media is motivated to do their jobs (whatever that would take), then for all intents and purposes, there will NEVER be an Obama scandal.
Seems clear enough to me.
But then I don’t have to pretend to be objective, do I?
CBS is still MSM, yes? Lt. Col. Woods was interviewed on the teevee and I believe is to appear before congress soon.
Old media still serves a purpose, albiet not much of one. New media is all over all of these stories and they reach a larger audience. Who still reads a deadtree newspaper? Show of hands?
Checked the cbsnews.com website, lately?
Did you know Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman were separating? Do you know why glasses are so expensive? Mila Kunis voted the sexiest woman alive.
These are all higher up on their web page than any mention of Libya.
Sure, the old media will report scandalous actions, but they won’t be actual scandals until they get billed over stories about the high price of glasses.
Is that all there is?