Hawker-Beechcraft Denied Big Air Force Contract in Favor of Brazilian Company With Soros Connections
From A Time For Choosing:
Here’s a little something that caught my eye today. It seems after investing around $100 million in this project, Hawker-Beechcraft has been excluded from a contract, worth almost $1 billion, to build a new light air support plane.
What intrigues me is the Brazilian company Embraer, the likely contract winner, is currently under investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Justice Department, for possible violations of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
According to Financial Times, Embraer is “venturing into the defense industry” and “is one of a select few Brazilian companies that has managed to break out of the Latin American market and compete on a global scale”
You can read more about the corruption investigation here.
Here’s what the Wichita Eagle is reporting:
Hawker Beechcraft Corp. says the Air Force has informed the company that it lost out on a military contract worth nearly $1 billion.
The company had hoped to win the Light Air Support contract with its AT-6, an armed version of its T-6 trainer. But on Friday, the company said it received a letter from the Air Force saying the AT-6 had been excluded from the competition. The company wants an explanation.
According to the company’s news release: “The letter provides no basis for the exclusion. We are both confounded and troubled by this decision, as we have been working closely with the Air Force for two years and, with our partners Lockheed Martin, CMC Esterline, Pratt & Whitney Canada, L-3 WESCAM and CAE, have invested more than $100 million preparing to meet the Air Force’s specific requirements.”
The piston planes are designed for counterinsurgency, close air support, armed overwatch and homeland security.
Read the rest at A Time For Choosing.
From The National Patriot:
The liberty Legal Foundation has announced that the case pending in Georgia, challenging Obama’s eligibility, has been ACCEPTED.
This is great news considering Obama and his team of attorneys had been actively trying to have this case DENIED!!
The Georgia court in agreeing to hear the case could well be setting the stage for other states in which quite similar cases are pending. Arizona and Tennessee both have such cases waiting right now.
This case, in Georgia, deals specifically with the Natural Born Citizen issue.
In a previous article, we brought up the Minor vs Happersett case from 1875 in which the Supreme Court defined a NBC as one who has 2 parents which were citizens at the time of the subject’s birth. We also cited 3 other cases in which the Supreme Court, previous to the Minor case, said the same thing.
Since Obama’s father, at the time of Barack’s birth, was not a U.S. citizen, nor did he ever become one, according to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1875…Obama is NOT a Natural Born Citizen.
If not a NBC…then, according to the Constitution, Obama is ineligible to serve as President.
So…how long will THIS take before a hearing will occur?
Not NEARLY as long as you might think.
Read the rest at The National Patriot.
From The Blaze:
In a defiant display of executive power, President Barack Obama on Wednesday will “stick his thumb in the eye” of GOP opposition and name Richard Cordray as the nation’s chief consumer watchdog. Outraged Republican leaders in Congress suggested that courts would determine the appointment was illegal.
But why are Republican leaders outraged at this recess appointment? Well, mostly because the Senate is still in session.
Although President Obama has constitutional power to make appointments during a congressional recess, Republicans have moved to keep that from happening by having the Senate running in “pro forma” sessions, meaning open for business in name with no actual business planned.
The Senate held such a session on Tuesday and planned another one on Friday. Republicans contend Obama cannot make a recess appointment during a break of less than three days, based on years of precedent.
The Obama White House contends such an approach is a gimmick. For all practical purposes, the Senate is in recess and Obama is free to make the appointment on his own.
McConnell said that Obama’s move “lands this appointee in uncertain legal territory, threatens the confirmation process and fundamentally endangers the Congress’ role in providing a check on the excesses of the executive branch.
The president plans to argue that the appointment was necessary because, with a new director in place, the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau can start overseeing the mortgage companies, payday lenders, debt collectors and other financial companies.
Read the rest at The Blaze.
From AlinksyDefeater’s Blog:
President Barack Obama has pushed the level of Executive Power well beyond what any previous President has done with his recent, so-called, recess appointments. The only problems are not only are the nominees so controversial that they can’t get Democratically controlled Senate approval, but the Senate is technically not even in recess.
Even the Liberal New York Times had this to say about Obama’s “recess appointments”:
President Obama’s decision on Wednesday to grant recess appointments to four officials — even though the Senate contends that it is not in recess — was an unprecedented legal step that brought into sharper focus a recent bipartisan struggle over presidential power
In 2007, concerning Bush recess appointments, then Senator Obama said,
It’s disappointing that President Bush would defy the will of Congress by appointing Sam Fox Ambassador to Belgium. I opposed Mr. Fox’s nomination because I had serious concerns about his candor, judgment, and qualifications for this important post. Appointing nominees that are opposed by a majority in Congress simply because they are political cronies is old style politics at its worst. Our nation’s ambassadors should possess strong credibility and character so that they may effectively represent U.S. interests overseas, and I don’t think President Bush applied that test with this recess appointment.
It is one thing for a President to be hypocritical, there is not much new in that. It is quite another for a President who is a Constitutional scholar to have such utter disregard for the guiding document of our nation.
From The American:
This could be just the beginning. If President Barack Obama’s legally dodgy appointment of Richard Cordray to head the consumer finance agency should stick, it may open the door to more such actions. Here’s Jaret Seiberg of the Washington Research Group:
To us, the most important takeaway from a recess appointment of Cordray is that the President could use this same maneuver to put a housing advocate in charge of FHFA.
And why is that important? The Federal Housing Finance Agency is the regulator and conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And the FHFA currently has an acting director, Edward DeMarco. If Obama replaces him with a “housing advocate” via the same recess appointment process, here’s what might happen next, according to Seiberg:
That could lead to a mass refinancing program for agency-backed mortgages that would go well beyond the existing HARP program. That could hurt agency MBS pricing and result in higher financing costs going forward. Yet it also could be a big boost for the economy and housing going into the election.
Read the rest at The American