Alex Jones Marks Bundy Ranch Anniversary With False Flag Attack Conspiracy Theory

This weekend marked the first anniversary of the Bureau of Land Management’s decision to pull out of the tense armed standoff with militia groups at Cliven Bundy’s ranch in Nevada, which Bundy celebrated by holding a weekend-long party and Infowars host Alex Jones marked by spinning a conspiracy theory about government “false flag” attacks.

In a special segment marking the anniversary of the Bundy standoff, which centered around the rancher’s refusal to recognize court rulings which ordered him to pay grazing fees, Jones claimed that federal forces were ready to “massacre” the activists at the ranch but didn’t because “if they would have massacred the people out there, it would have caused a revolution from our angle, no amount of false flags would have won.”

Blaming the murder of two police officers by a couple who had spent time at the Bundy ranch on a governmentfalse flagoperation, Jones claimed that the government backed down in Nevada because they want to provoke a civil war by staging a false flag attack on a daycare center and blaming it on right-wing extremists.

“It came that moment of chicken, they backed down and it freaked the gangsters out like Harry Reid,” Jones said. “And they didn’t understand, when they blow up federal buildings and blame it on us or shoot a few cops and blame it on some loons that are upset with super hero stuff and into nihilism, we’re not going to buy you blaming us. We’re not here to be enslaved, we’re not here to be cannon fodder in your war, we don't want a physical war, but push comes to shove, it’s over.

“And if they would have massacred the people out there, it would have caused a revolution from our angle, no amount of false flags would have won. That’s why they don’t want to have the revolution there and backed off. They want to have false flags to say we launched the revolution by blowing up daycare centers — guaranteed they’ll pick a place with kids, theme park, you name it — they’re going to blame us.”

Filed Under

Sandy Rios: Possibly Lesbian Hillary Clinton Excluded 'Anglo-American Husband-And-Wife' In Launch Video

On her radio program yesterday, American Family Association governmental affairs director Sandy Rios once again suggested that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian, telling listeners that “rumors swirl” about Clinton’s sexuality since she promoted “lesbianism” during the 1995 World Conference on Women in Beijing. Rios also speculated that the appearance of a lesbian couple in Clinton’s campaign launch video was another clue about her sexual orientation.

“When it comes to lesbian couples being featured on her video, please keep in mind that Hillary Clinton was one of the first public officials to push this whole notion of embracing homosexuality,” Rios said. “I would never forget my own personal shock in the late ‘90s when there was a women’s conference in Beijing and Hillary Clinton was in charge and they brought in women from all over the world at this UN conference, and the emphasis for the American delegation under Hillary’s tutelage was on lesbianism. There was a tent on lesbian lovemaking, there was an insistence that there were not just two genders at the time, they said there were five genders.”

Rios added that Clinton has “always advocated for homosexuality, rumors swirl around her.”

“It’s going to be hard to take listening to her talk” if she gets elected president, Rios said, adding that Clinton’s campaign video “features everybody except, you know, Anglo-American husband-and-wife with family in church.”

Filed Under

Klayman: Hillary Clinton 'Is Technically A Woman But She Acts Like An Evil Man'

Conservative legal activist Larry Klayman, who thinks that it’s “past time that Hillary, the ‘Wicked Witch of the Left,’ be put behind bars,” spoke last month with far-right radio host Pete Santilli — who once called for Clinton to be “shot in the vagina” — about why he thinks Clinton should be in prison. 

Klayman alleged that Rep. Trey Gowdy’s Select Committee on Benghazi isn’t moving fast enough to prosecute Clinton, saying that he will step up to the plate since the committee is “for show and not for dough.” 

He claimed that Gowdy refuses to go after Clinton since “he is afraid of being seen of beating up on a woman,” although the former secretary of state, he argued, “is technically a woman but she acts more like an evil man.” “It’s the same deference that they paid to Obama, everyone in this country is afraid of being called a sexist or racist,” Klayman added.

Filed Under

Return Of The Rubio Birthers

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio’s announcement yesterday that he will seek the Republican presidential nomination has brought back a strain of far-right birtherism that contends that Rubio is not eligible to be president because his parents were not U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.

In its write-up of Rubio’s announcement, birther outlet WorldNetDaily (which has been a big promoter of Ted Cruz’s candidacy) cites unnamed people who “contend Rubio’s not even a natural-born citizen and therefore, ineligible to seek the presidency”:

Meanwhile, others contend Rubio’s not even a natural-born citizen and therefore, ineligible to seek the presidency. Rubio’s parents, as WND previously reported on at least two occasions, were not U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.

Rubio was born in Miami, Florida, on May 28, 1971, to Mario and Oriales Rubio, who were born in Cuba, though the senator has not released his birth certificate for the world to scrutinize.

As WND reported in 2011, Rubio press secretary Alex Burgos said the senator’s parents “were permanent legal residents of the U.S.” at the time Marco was born in 1971.

Then four years after Marco was born, “Mario and Oriales Rubio became naturalized U.S. citizens on Nov. 5, 1975,” Burgos told WND.

WND links to a 2012 article by its chief birther reporter Jerome Corsi, who cited far-right attorney Larry Klayman’s argument that the Constitution “requires a person eligible to be president to be born to parents who are each U.S. citizens at the time of the birth.”

Mainstream legal scholarship — as exhaustively detailed in a 2009 Congressional Research Service memo  and a 2011 report — rejects this, finding that the Constitution merely requires that a president have been eligible for U.S. citizenship at birth. Under Klayman’s rule, not only would President Obama be ineligible for the presidency, but so would Rubio, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Cruz.

The website of Bradlee Dean, a longtime Michele Bachmann ally, also published an essay yesterday claiming that Rubio is ineligible for the presidency and calling the senator an “anchor baby.”

Suzanne Hamner writes on Dean’s “Sons of Liberty” website: “If Obama is hailed as the ‘first’ black president, one could say Rubio is the ‘first’ anchor baby contender.”

“Haven’t we, as citizens of this nation, been harmed by the current ineligible occupant of the Oval Office?” she asks.

Wikipedia, while not considered a truly reliable source, states Marco Rubio was born on May 23, 1971, to “Mario Rubio and Oria Garcia” who were Cubans that “immigrated to the United States in 1956 and were naturalized as US citizens in 1975.”

So, Sen. Marco Rubio needs to clearly establish his eligibility to hold the office of the President of the United States in order to receive the party nomination. Neither of Rubio’s parents were citizens of the United States until 1975, four years after Rubio’s birth. Under this scenario, one could acquaint it to the “anchor baby born today being elected president upon reaching the age of thirty-five and living within the US for fourteen years.” Is Marco Rubio comfortable in claiming “natural born” citizen status in order to run for president? Clearly, he is. But, Rubio is ineligible to run and hold the office of the President of the United States. If Obama is hailed as the “first” black president, one could say Rubio is the “first” anchor baby contender. If Rubio is a supporter, protector and defender of the Constitution, he needs to put his money where his mouth is.

Rubio’s supporters, along with those of Ted Cruz, will vehemently defend their candidate’s natural born citizen status regardless of the evidence to the contrary based on history indicating the framers did not subscribe to the natural-born citizen status as being anything but a child born of two citizen parents. Those who admit neither of these two candidates truly meets that all important requirement will declare that “it’s our turn,” “the Dems did it with Obama, so can we,” or “they would be better than Obama.” The problem in all of this remains consistency with the law.

The Democrats cannot protest as it would confirm that Obama would be ineligible thereby exposing the criminal, lawless, treasonous activities of the Democratic National Committee, key Democrats in Congress, such as Pelosi, the Republican National Committee, key Republicans in Congress, RINOs and complicity of the state governments in allowing Obama on the ticket, not to mention the numerous judges at every level who have upheld Obama’s eligibility. And, why would judges refuse to hear valid legal arguments opposing Obama’s eligibility if the definition of “natural born citizen” did not mean an individual born to two citizen parents?

Judges have denied hearing the case based on “standing” and “establishment of harm.” Isn’t every US citizen harmed by an individual holding the office of the President when eligibility is in question? Shouldn’t every US citizen have “standing” in a case such as this? It would mean the President has divided loyalty and would possibly not conduct business within the confines of the Constitution nor have the best interest of the country at heart. Are we not actually witness to that with Obama? Haven’t we, as citizens of this nation, been harmed by the current ineligible occupant of the Oval Office?

Filed Under

Walid Shoebat: Bachmann Criticism Shows US Is 'Behaving As An Islamist Society'

In an interview with far-right radio host Pete Santilli last month, anti-Muslim activist Walid Shoebat cited former Rep. Michele Bachmann’s conspiracy theories about former Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin to assert that Clinton was promoting the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in the State Department, adding that criticism of such conspiracy theories shows that “we are really behaving as an Islamist society.”

Shoebat, who has previously pushed bizarre conspiracy theories about Abedin, said tha​t criticism of Bachmann from people like Republican Sen. John McCain shows that “the corruption that goes on in Turkey is happening in the U.S.”

Shoebat had a sympathetic audience in Santilli, who in 2013 infamously called for Clinton to be “ tried, convicted and shot in the vagina.”

There’s no eye looking at what Clinton is doing with the Muslim Brotherhood. And the moment you say anything about it, I mean Bachmann talked about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltration in America and she was attacked by McCain, by even, RINOs began to attack her the moment she brought up the issue.

The moment you talk about it, you are labeled as an Islamophobe, you are labeled as a hatemonger. But what about the evidence? The evidence isn’t even examined. In other words, what we see happening in this country is that we are really behaving as an Islamist society. We are very much akin to Turkey. Look at Turkey, the corruption that goes on in Turkey is happening in the U.S.

Pat Robertson: Child Of Woman Who Had An Abortion Might Worry She'll 'Kill Me Later On'

Today on “The 700 Club,” a viewer sought advice from host Pat Robertson about how she should break the news to her children that she once had an abortion.

“It’s up to you as to what to tell your children,” Robertson said. “I don’t know their level of maturity, if they start thinking, ‘Maybe it would have been us and she might want to kill me later on.’ You want to make sure they are mature enough and old enough to handle this. To say, ‘You’ve got a baby sister in Heaven,’ that might handle it, but you have got to be careful how you phrase it.”

Filed Under

Gary Cass: Satan Using 'Gay Abortionists' To 'Attack Humanity'

A few months ago, Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission began producing a regular "Defending a Christian Worldview" webcast in which he weighs in on issues that have been in the news in the previous week.

On the most recent installment, Cass explained that gay marriage and abortion are both satanic attacks on the image of God and His command to "be fruitful and multiply."

Warning that "gay abortionists" are out to "destroy the fruit of heterosexuality," Cass declared that Satan uses both abortion and gay marriage to "attack humanity at the core of their essence where the image of God resides, to destroy them sexually, to destroy the fruit of their womb."

"If you're Satan, that makes perfect sense," he said. "It's all an attack on the image of God":

Filed Under

Religious Right Pundit: Hillary Clinton Too Ugly To Be President

Don Feder of the World Congress of Families is out today with a column titled “Top Ten Reasons Why Hitlery Will Never Be President,” in which he calls the former secretary of state “a frustrated, middle-aged feminist who's perpetually incensed.”

Feder, decrying Clinton as an elitist and a radical ideologue, ends his piece by asserting that Clinton will be brought down by “the hideousness factor.”

The “pro-family” activist writes that “Lyndon Baines Johnson was the last profoundly ugly candidate to be elected president,” adding that “voters don't want a leader who looks frazzled or frumpy.”

Think Evita after Botox treatments. Think Madame Defarge on a bad hair day. Think Lady Macbeth with serious issues ("Out, out, damned bimbo!").

To listen to the babbling heads, you'd think the Goldwater girl-turned-Alinsky-disciple could start preparing her acceptance speech (maybe Eleanor Roosevelt will help her write it). "Ooh, she'll raise so much money." "Ooh, women want a woman president." In the immortal words of General Anthony McAuliffe: "Nuts!"

Win the White House? Hillary couldn't win a popularity contest if she was the only contestant.



10. The Hideousness Factor – Lyndon Baines Johnson was the last profoundly ugly candidate to be elected president, and he was a legacy of the martyred JFK. Voters don't want a leader who looks frazzled or frumpy. We're told that Lincoln was too homely to be elected president in an age of television and paparazzi. But Lincoln's homely face had a dignity, a gravitas. If nothing else, we want a face that reassures us, not one that scares us, a la Night of the Living Alinskyites.

Conservatives might as well get in their licks in now. After Iowa, we won't have Hillary to kick around any more [sic].

Filed Under

Christian Nation Activist David Lane Asks Pastors To Pray For Anti-Marriage-Equality 'Miracle'

Christian-nation activist and would-be presidential kingmaker David Lane is urging pastors affiliated with his American Renewal Project to preach about “Biblical Marriage” on Sunday, April 26, and hold a two-hour prayer service on Tuesday, April 28, the day the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on the constitutionality of state bans on same-sex couples getting married.

Lane’s email letter asserts that Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan should recuse themselves since they “have performed homosexual marriage ceremonies,” but that they have refused to because “secularists lack virtue.” Lane, who advocates for making the Bible a primary textbook in public schools, blames Supreme Court decisions upholding church-state separation for a “complete moral breakdown in America.”

America has become drugged by the cup of Secularism -- a false and wicked religion -- articulated in the Humanist Manifesto, a creed that denied supernatural relevation, and so the revelation of God in Jesus Christ. The "religion" -- as it was called in the Humanist Manifesto (1933) -- was imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1963, an 8-1 decision, in Abington School District v. Schempp. Lone dissenting Justice Potter Stewart prophesied, "...[the decision to remove the Bible from public schools] led not to true neutrality with respect to religion, but to the establishment of a religion of secularism."

That proud and tragic decision has given birth to a complete moral breakdown in America, those doing this to our country must be held accountable. The wise Solomon says, "Where there is no revelation the people cast off restraint; but blessed is the one who heeds wisdom's instruction."(Proverbs 29:10) America's Founders laid the foundation on biblical virtue, His Word. Udo W. Middleman, president of the Francis A. Schaeffer Foundation says, "He has told us in his Word how we should live and order our lives, set our priorities, and what sense to make of being human." A Christian nation once, America is now ruled by an oligarchy, a majority of nine, representing, "Vice stalking in virtue's garb."

God defines sin, not the U.S. Supreme Court. Having removed the fixed point in order to judge in 1963, the esteemed Justices, in hubris, decided to challenge God's rule, God's throne, and God's rightful Honor. America is on the verge of learning something that can be learned in no other way, rebellion against God brings consequences. There is no safety in distance from God.

Like many Religious Right leaders, Lane blames the state of America on the fact that pastors have not been preaching or praying aggressively enough:

Why are not the churches of America filled with prayer services, led by senior pastors, asking God for mercy of what we have allowed to a once Christian nation? Who will, by faith, help America's pastors track down the weapons of warfare? Prayer and tears are the Christians weapons of war, very little cannonading and bombardment appears to be occurring in America's sanctuaries today.

Lane seems to think that, without divine intervention, the Supreme Court is likely to rule that marriage bans for same-sex couples violate the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

For those of the flock who cannot attend the prayer service led by the shepherd, please ask that they stop where they are and pray; we need a miracle.

GOP Committeewoman: Muslim, Wiccan Statehouse Prayers Show Need For Christianity In Public Schools

Last year, the Religious Right largely celebrated the Supreme Court’s decision in Town of Greece v. Galloway, in which the court ruled that municipalities can open meetings with sectarian prayers as long as minority faiths aren’t excluded and attendance isn’t mandatory.

But the protections for minority religions don’t seem to have completely sunk in for everybody in the movement, as was made clear last week at a Republican presidential forum hosted by the influential Iowa conservative group The Family Leader. As we noted earlier, the message at the forum centered on claims that conservative Christians are losing religious liberty in America, but that didn’t stop The Family Leader President Bob Vander Plaats from warning that a Wiccan prayer at the Iowa statehouse that morning might cause God to withdraw His blessing from America.

Tamara Scott, an Iowa member of the Republican National Committee who is also a lobbyist for The Family Leader, struck a similar note in her remarks to the forum, saying that the Wiccan prayer and the invocation delivered by a Muslim imam the previous day showed the need to teach Christian-nation history in public schools.

Scott joked that she had prayed for a storm to greet the Wiccan woman that morning, before telling the audience that the non-Christian prayers at the statehouse showed that “when we’re not willing to defend our God in the public square, we shouldn’t be surprised when others try to replace Him.”

“What you don’t know is that yesterday, the imam prayed,” she said. “That one didn’t make the press. You see, when we’re not willing to defend our God in the public square, we shouldn’t be surprised when others try to replace Him. When we fail to teach it in the public school, the history of this nation, the God mentioned in our Declaration, the Supreme Being mentioned in the preamble of this constitution of the state. And we not only don’t teach it, but we surpress it and refuse to allow it to be taught.”

“We shouldn’t be surprised when others do differently and expect differently and think that religion is just about equality, because it’s not,” she continued. “There’s only one true God. And the Bible’s quite clear about what happens when we refuse to tell the truth and we allow others to tell a wrong truth. That’s where we’re at. We’ve been neglectful, we’ve been very neglectful. So no one even spoke about the imam being there yesterday or the Muslims that were all around the center of the capitol, talking and evangelizing about their way of life.

“Do they have that freedom? Absolutely. But the shame is that so little people know the truth about the heritage, the Christian heritage — I’m sorry, Mr. President, but we are, we were a Christian nation and we were founded on Christian values.”

Filed Under