May 10, 2013 | GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
Posted on 05/10/2013 12:33:21 PM PDT by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
Fox News' Megan Kelly interviewed the parents of SEAL Team 6 member Aaron Vaughn who perished in the tragic crash of a CH-47 helicopter on August 06 2011 in Afghanistan. During this interview the Vaughs stated that this crash was a direct result of traitorous rules of engagement ordered by the Obama administration that have consistently proven deadly to our troops (It should be noted here that "Over Twice as Many…
BOMBSHELL: Was the downing of SEAL Team 6's CH-47 helicopter an inside job?
Posted on Fri May 10 14:33:21 2013 by GeorgeWashingtonsGhost
Fox News' Megan Kelly interviewed the parents of SEAL Team 6 member Aaron Vaughn who perished in the tragic crash of a CH-47 helicopter on August 06 2011 in Afghanistan. During this interview the Vaughs stated that this crash was a direct result of traitorous rules of engagement ordered by the Obama administration that have consistently proven deadly to our troops (It should be noted here that "Over Twice as Many U.S. Soldiers Have Died in Afghanistan Under Obama In 3 1/2 Years Than Did Under Bush in 8 Years..")
Although the exact number of SEALs killed has been misstated in the media, it is known that 17 SEALs died in this crash. The other 8 American dead include soldiers/special operators and airmen (See Below). There were also 7 Afghan troops aboard the helicopter.
Why was a commercial grade, vintage 1960's helicopter used for this mission? Why wasn't the more heavily armored military grade version, MH-47 used? Why were so many SEALs placed aboard one helicopter, rather than two? Were these SEALs deliberately sent into an ambush for the purpose of silencing them? Was this an 'inside job' by Afghans in retaliation for SEAL Team 6's Osama Bin Laden raid?
Perhaps the most stunning revelation from this interview is that the names of the 7 Afghans placed aboard this helicopter as shown on the flight manifest are NOT the same individuals who actually died in this crash.. The 7 Afghans slated for this flight were SWAPPED with different Afghans at the last minute yet the flight manifest was not changed to reflect the swap. Was the helicopter downed by the Afghans on board this flight? Did the Afghans involved with this flight tip off their comrades down range to plan their strike on this helicopter? Did the Afghans influence the decision to swap their occupants with their own hit team inside?
The Vaugn family is outraged that Vice President Biden outed SEAL Team 6 as the group who executed the Osama Bin Laden raid. She said that because of Biden's 'leak', SEAL Team 6 had "a target put on their backs". Mrs. Vaughn had been personally warned by her own son via telephone to "wipe her social media clean". Mr. Vaughn suggested Joe Biden be held accountable for his remarks which far surpass mere 'gaffes' and that have cost American troops their lives. "They sympathize with the enemy. They sympathize with the ideology" of the enemy, he said.
Emails Released: Congress Was Asking for Updates on IG’s IRS Audit Before 2012 Election
May. 23, 2013 9:22am
Members of the House Oversight committee were promised in 2012 that they’d be provided with updates on the inspector general’s audit of the Internal Revenue Service, a promise that was apparently broken.
The following letter — which came out this weekend — shows that J. Russell George, the inspector general who uncovered the scandal, most definitely agreed to provide committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Cali.) with details of the IRS audit:
Obviously, this didn’t happen. Congress only became aware of the details of the the IG’s report after the presidential election.
And it’s not as if the Oversight committee didn’t try to learn more about the IG audit.
The following emails — released late Wednesday — show that the Oversight committee in 2012 repeatedly asked for updates on the audit, but didn’t receive them:
Rep. Issa on Wednesday brought up these emails and questioned George about why he didn’t keep Congress informed of the audit’s findings. The IG excused his keeping Congress in the dark, but he did not dispute the congressman’s timeline:
Was the report withheld because it wasn’t ready? Was it withheld so that it wouldn’t sway the presidential election?
We can speculate all day long as to why the IG didn’t release the audit on schedule. But what is beyond speculation, according to committee chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), is that the IG should have kept Oversight members updated about the report’s findings. From POLITICO:
Issa is referring to part of the Inspector General Act that requires watchdogs to report serious problems to Congress through the head of an agency within seven days. It’s known as the “seven-day rule” — but it’s often used sparingly.
The Oversight Committee asked the inspector general about conservative group targeting a number of times, and Issa read some of the emails in the hearing Wednesday.
George also raised concerns that incremental information provided to lawmakers would ultimately leak to the public.
“That is not fair to the people we are investigating,” George said.
Issa responded that the White House is the source of plenty of leaks as well.
True, Rep. Issa said last year that he knew the basics of the report. But as Hot Air notes, “it’s one thing to think you know based on a leak and another for the IG to confirm it with an update.”
Furthermore, it’s important to note that the IG kept details of its delayed report a secret even after the IRS had conducted its own internal investigation and found that its targeting of conservative groups was “inappropriate” (that report was also hidden from Congress).
“Just yesterday the committee interviewed Holly Paz, the director of exempt organizations, rulings and agreements, division of the IRS,” Congressman Issa said Wednesday.
“While a tremendous amount of attention is centered about the Inspector General’s report, or investigation, the committee has learned from Ms. Paz that she in fact participated in an IRS internal investigation that concluded in May of 2012 – May 3 of 2012 – and found essentially the same thing that Mr. George found more than a year later,” he added:
“Think about it,” the congressman continued. “For more than a year, the IRS knew that it had inappropriately targeted groups of Americans based on their political beliefs, and without mentioning it, and in fact without honestly answering questions that were the result of this internal investigation.”
So why didn’t the IG keep Congress informed? As of this writing, it’s not entirely clear. Here, this excerpt from Hot Air sums up where things stand right now:
The media starts picking up reports of tea-party complaints in February 2012, and soon thereafter the director of the exempt organizations puts a halt to IRS demands for more intrusive info from conservative groups. Three months later, in May, they hold a “workshop” providing guidance on tax-exempt groups to its analysts and approv more neutral criteria for scrutinizing applications.
That’s probably why Issa’s committee had an inkling at the time — because the IRS itself already knew it had done wrong and was moving to undo it to some extent. And yet no one, including the IG, felt moved to confirm for the committee until this month that yes, “mistakes were made” and it was now safe to tell the public that.
Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter
Featured image courtesy AFP.
IRS Inspector General, Darrell Issa Communicated Multiple Times In 2012 (huffingtonpost.com)
THE BLAZE by BECKET ADAMS (MY TWO SENSE: Representative Trey Gowdy of South Carolina is my hero–do you hear me NBA’s gay spokesperson, Collins? Standing up against anyone in bed with this administration, takes guts. I hope he keeps it up. And Trey, if you have any secrets in your background which you would find embarrassing if made public, you had better come out with it before this administration does. They will stop at nothing to bring you down. Unfortunate, I know, that whistle blowers are now intimidated into silence, but I certainly hope that the latest show of arrogance, from Lerner, will enrage one of them and force a public confrontation! JM)
Trey Gowdy at It Again — This Time with a Jack Bauer Reference!
May. 23, 2013 1:44pm
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) became a viral sensation on Wednesday with his tough questioning of former IRS head Doug Shulman during a House hearing on the IRS targeting of conservatives.
And if you liked him then, you may love him today after he delivered an interview where he was able to sneak in a Jack Bauer reference.
Lois Lerner, the IRS official at the center of the increasingly serious IRS scandal, caused a stir on Wednesday after she declared her innocence before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and then invoked her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.
She steadily refused to answer the committee’s questions and was later excused from the hearing by Congressman Darrell Issa, R-Calif.
However, Lerner’s decision to claim innocence in her opening remarks has raised some people questioning whether she accidentally waived her Fifth Amendment right.
“You don’t get to say, ‘I didn’t rob the bank but I’m not going to answer the prosecutor’s questions,’” Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, explained in an interview Thursday morning. “That would never happen.”
Rep. Gowdy continued, explaining Rep. Issa’s options.
“Let’s play this out. Let’s assume he brings her back. I promise she’s not going to make the same mistake today that she made yesterday,” he said. “She’s going to invoke — you can’t make someone talk unless you’re name is Jack Bauer.”
“You can’t force some to talk,” Gowdy continued. “You can’t make people talk unless you’re will(sic) to do what Jack Bauer does.”
Jack Bauer is the main character in the hit Fox TV series “24,” an action-drama about counterterrorism in the US. Played by Kiefer Sutherland, Bauer is an agent with the fictional Counter Terrorist Unit who “plays by his own rules,” “is a one-man wrecking crew,” etc.
“So are we going to hold her in contempt? Are we going to put her in jail? Are we going to offer her immunity, which I would not be a fan of, or are we going to try to build a case without using her testimony?” the congressman asked.
Gowdy continued, adding that these questions will be reviewed and answered at the chairman speaker level:
The South Carolina congressman isn’t alone in thinking Lerner may have accidentally waived her Fifth Amendment right. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said Wednesday that she could be held in contempt of court and jailed for refusing to testify before Congress.
“She’s in trouble. She can be held in contempt,” Dershowitz told the “Steve Malzberg Show.” “Congress . . . can actually hold you in contempt and put you in the Congressional jail.”
“You can’t simply make statements about a subject and then plead the Fifth in response to questions about the very same subject,” he added. “Once you open the door to an area of inquiry, you have waived your Fifth Amendment right . . . you’ve waived your self-incrimination right on that subject matter.”
“The law is as clear as could be, that once you open up an area of inquiry, you can’t shut off the spigot – that’s the metaphor that the Supreme Court has used,” he said.
However, a few pundits think there may be a problem with this argument.
“While you may not selectively invoke the 5th in a criminal trial, you probably can at a Congressional hearing, so she won’t be held in contempt,” the Ace of Spades HQ blog notes.
“She will, however, be made to look awful, which sounds about right,” it adds.
Then there’s this from New York magazine:
First, unlike in a trial, where she could choose to take the stand or not, Lerner had no choice but to appear before the committee. Second, in a trial there would be a justifiable concern about compromising a judge or jury by providing them with “selective, partial presentation of the facts.” But Congress is merely pursuing information as part of an investigation, not making a definitive ruling on Lerner’s guilt or innocence.
“When somebody is in this situation,” says Duane, a Harvard Law graduate whose 2008 lecture on invoking the Fifth Amendment with police has been viewed on YouTube nearly 2.5 million times, “when they are involuntarily summoned before grand jury or before legislative body, it is well settled that they have a right to make a ‘selective invocation,’ as it’s called, with respect to questions that they think might raise a meaningful risk of incriminating themselves.”
In fact, Duane says, “even if Ms. Lerner had given answers to a few questions — five, ten, twenty questions — before she decided, ‘That’s where I draw the line, I’m not answering any more questions,’ she would be able to do that as well.” Such uses of selective invocation “happen all the time.”
And this excerpt from Hot Air is worth considering:
What happens when Issa brings her back and the questions begin? Could be that she’ll cave and start answering, but I assume her lawyer will tell her to take the Fifth again, in which case it’s Issa’s move. He could try to hold her in contempt, which would probably ignite a court battle and would certainly ignite lots of media concern-trolling about the GOP crushing Lerner’s rights as a way to change the subject from the underlying scandal. The court battle would slow down the investigation and might spark a bit of public sympathy for Lerner and the IRS…
Politically, it might even be worth losing the court battle: Litigation will only call more attention to the fact that Lerner doesn’t want to talk for mysterious reasons, which makes the IRS’s actions look that much shadier.
… why not bring her back and make her sit through an hour or so of serially re-asserting her privilege to dozens of questions? Worst-case scenario, the dodginess of the spectacle puts even more pressure on the IRS. Best-case scenario, she’ll decide to answer questions selectively, which will add a bit more information to what the committee knows.
SC congressman grills IRS officials (thestate.com)
Trey Gowdy: Believes Lois Lerner Waived Her Fifth Amendment Right (freebeacon.com)
Issa: Lois Lerner lost her 5th Amendment Rights (conservativebyte.com)
Who is this man?
Submitted by sosadmin on Mon, 11/26/2012 – 15:37
Please note that by playing this clip YouTube and Google will place a long term cookie on your computer.
Start the clip at 3:50 and prepare to be totally shocked. When you suspend habeas corpus, which has been a principle — even before our country, it’s the foundation of Anglo-American law — which says very simply that if the government grabs you, then you have the right to at least ask ‘Why was I grabbed?’ and say ‘Maybe you’ve got the wrong person.’ You know, the reason you have that safeguard is because we don’t always have the right person. We don’t always catch the right person. We may think this is Mohammed the terrorist — it might be Mohammed the cab driver. You may think it’s Barack the bomb thrower, but it might be Barack the guy running for president. So the point is, so the reason that you have this principle is not to be ‘soft on terrorism’. It’s because that’s who we are. That’s what we’re protecting. Don’t mock the Constitution. Don’t make fun of it. Don’t suggest that it’s un-American to abide by what the Founding Fathers set up. It’s done pretty well for over 200 years. That was Senator Obama in 2008 on the campaign trail during his first of two successful presidential campaigns. Barack Obama of 2008, I’d like to introduce you to Barack Obama of 2012, who authorizes assassination by flying robot of people whose names the United States government does not know, but who fit some kind of “terrorist signature” pattern. Obama of 2008 should also meet the Obama of 2012 who will not explain whether his drones got “the right person” when they exploded 16 year old American citizen Abdulrahman al Aulaqi in 2011, or give any explanation whatsoever for the due process-less killing of this child from Denver. I don’t think that these two gentlemen would get along very well. In fact I think the one in the video above would find today’s President Obama to be a bit of a Constitution-mocker.
h/t Glenn Greenwald for the video sosadmin’s blog
UK Headline: ‘Barack Obama Is Rapidly Losing His Halo’ (pjmedia.com)
TOWNHALL by BEN SHAPIRO ( http://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2013/05/22/obama-america-racist-sexist-homophobic-n1602717/page/full )
Benjamin Shapiro was born in 1984 in Burbank, Calif. Brought up in the home of two Reagan Republicans, where intelligent conversation about politics and philosophy was encouraged, Ben Shapiro quickly developed into a reasoned political thinker and a powerful writer.
Ben Shapiro entered UCLA at the age of 16. Never afraid to antagonize his political opposition, he was the only counter-protester at an Affirmative Action Rally that drew over 1,500 people on UCLA’s campus, and he has repeatedly challenged liberal professors and faculty.
As a staunch conservative on the modern politically correct campus, Ben Shapiro faces the political liberals head-on. From exposing the leftist tilt of the professoriate on college campuses to addressing the conflict in the Middle East, Shapiro’s confrontational approach always draws a hailstorm of response.
Ben Shapiro was hired at age 17 to become the youngest nationally syndicated columnist in the U.S. His columns are printed nationwide in major newspapers and websites, including Townhall.com, WorldNetDaily.com, Frontpagemag.com, the Riverside Press-Enterprise and the Conservative Chronicle. His columns have also appeared in the Orlando Sentinel, Honolulu Star-Advertiser, RealClearPolitics.com, Jewish World Review, and he has been quoted on the O’Reilly Factor, in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Press, and in The American Conservative magazine, among many others.
Ben Shapiro is a regular guest on dozens of radio shows around the United States and Canada. He is also the author of the national bestseller, Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America’s Youth (May 2004, Thomas Nelson Inc./WND Books).
An Orthodox Jew, virtuosic violinist and hack golfer, Ben Shapiro graduated UCLA in June 2004 with a B.A. in Political Science. He is currently a student at Harvard Law School.
America has major problems.
Our economy has been stagnating for years on end, and the so-called recovery under way will have to continue at this pace for years simply to get us back to where we started. When it comes to the social ills plaguing America, the prospectus doesn’t look any rosier: increased rates of unwed motherhood, continuation of vast killing of the unborn, and cycles of bad decision-making leading to generations of crushing poverty.
None of the solutions to these problems can be found in greater government action. Yet the left suggests that only greater government can fix the issues that trouble Americans.
That’s because, according to the left, one grand, unifying problem underlies all the other problems: Americans are nasty.
Some Americans are poor because other Americans are greedy. Minorities are disproportionately poor because white Americans are racist. Women are trapped in socioeconomic oblivion because male Americans are sexist. America is not a melting pot. America is a hell pit designed to consume its non-white, male, Christian inhabitants.
How then can the patriarchal, xenophobic majority be defeated?
Only with a coalition of victims.
That is a coalition the left has been building for decades. Back in 1970, it was not unjustified to think of certain groups as victims of the majority. In 2013, however, it’s downright poisonous.
That poison spews from the mouth of the president of the United States. Preaching to the graduating class at Morehouse College last Sunday, President Obama told the black students that they would “have to work twice as hard as anyone else if you want to get by.” This, he said, made blacks in America very much like Hispanics, gays and women, all of whom are victims: “Many of you know what it’s like to be an outsider; to be marginalized; to feel the sting of discrimination. That’s an experience that so many other Americans share.
Hispanic Americans know that feeling when someone asks where they come from or tells them to go back. Gay and lesbian Americans feel it when a stranger passes judgment on their parenting skills or the love they share. Muslim Americans feel it when they’re stared at with suspicion because of their faith. Any woman who knows the injustice of earning less pay for doing the same work — she sure feels it.”
The true American experience, according to Obama — the shared experience that forges a unified view of our country — is marginalization. And marginalization justifies massive government interventionism to foster e pluribus unum.
But what happens when that marginalization ends? What happens when blacks in America are treated according to the content of their character rather than the color of their skin? What happens when Hispanics are welcomed with open arms? What happens when Americans become apathetic about the sex lives of others? What happens when women are treated with the same level of expectation and reward as men?
The liberal agenda goes bust. Obama knows that. And that’s why he must never allow consonance to be reached. It’s why America must remain a nasty, bigoted place: The moment that America becomes the melting pot, liberalism dies. We can go about our business without fear and without need for a huge government to wipe the slate clean for us.
And so the left inculcates victimhood. Generation after generation, children are taught that they are the victims of the society that raises them. Some Americans are indeed victims. But the vast majority of Americans — of every subgroup — are not. There is no real coalition of victims. There is merely a coalition of liberals masquerading as victims in need of a savior government.
- Obama: America Racist, Sexist, Homophobic (conservativeread.com)
- Ben Shapiro’s a beanie wearin’ homosexual!? (lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com)
- Conservative Writer Gets Owned By The Internet After Mocking NBA Player’s Coming Out (businessinsider.com)
- Ben Shapiro, Breitbart Columnist: Gay NBA Player Jason Collins Isn’t A ‘Hero’ (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)
- Ring-Wing Site Goes In On Obama’s Morehouse Speech: “Blacks Are Victimized For Being Black In Racist, Sexist, And Homophobic America” (bossip.com)
Pakistan: Calls for attacks on Christians emanate from Mosque loudspeakers
Tensions high where politician who lost election strives to incite violence.
By: Morning Star News
Tuesday, 21 May 2013, 12:05 (EST)
A Muslim political candidate suspected of murdering a Christian has instigated calls from mosque loudspeakers for attacks on Christians, whom he blames for his May 11 election loss.
Tensions were high in Punjab Province’s Okara district after provincial assembly seat candidate Mehr Abdul Sattar, sought by police in connection with a 2008 murder, on May 13 arranged for mosque calls for violence against Christian villages.
“Burn their homes to the ground … Punish them such that they forget Gojra and Joseph Colony,” blared village mosques in the district, according to Younas Iqbal, chairman of the Anjuman-e-Mazareen Punjab, a peasant movement fighting for land rights.
Iqbal told Morning Star News by phone that that when unofficial election results were announced on May 12, Sattar’s supporters ambushed a convoy of about 100 Christians on their way to congratulate his opponent on his victory.
“They destroyed two motorcycles and threw them in the canal, besides damaging a tractor,” Iqbal said. “We went to the Okara Saddar Police Station to register a case, but the police officials refused to move against Mehr.”
Recent religious furor has been easily stoked in Pakistan. In Lahore on March 9, about 3,000 Muslims attacked Christians in Joseph Colony, destroying 175 homes, after rumors spread of an alleged remark against Islam by a Christian. In Gojra in 2009, eight Christians were burned alive, 100 houses looted and 50 homes set ablaze after a blasphemy accusation.
Sattar has targeted Christians in several villages, designated by number-letter combinations from British colonial times, particularly village 8/4-L, for voting against him, Iqbal said. Christians largely voted for Mian Yawar Zaman, also a Muslim, for a provincial assembly seat in the general election on May 11.
Iqbal said that early on May 13, Sattar’s men prevented the Christian principal of the Government Primary School, Shamoun Masih, men from entering the institution.
“They told Shamoun that since the Christians had voted against Mehr, he wouldn’t be allowed inside,” he said. “They also roughed him up, but there were no serious injuries. In 3/4-L village, Amjad Masih was harassed.”
Iqbal added that Sattar’s supporters had also forcibly occupied land of some Christians.
“The threat of violence in 8/4-L is most serious because of the tiny Christian population there,” Iqbal said of the village of roughly 600 Christians. “Sensing the gravity of the situation, we immediately informed Zaman, the legislator-elect, who pressed the police to deploy personnel in the village.”
Okara Police Chief Rao Jabbar told Morning Star News that officers would take all necessary measures to protect the Christian peasants.
“We have taken notice of the inciting speeches made by Mehr Abdul Sattar, and I have assured the Christians that we will initiate legal action against him,” Jabbar said. “Meantime, I’ve directed all police officers concerned to remain vigilant and ensure that there is no damage to life and property of the Christians.”
Police have been helpless in the face of Sattar, though, Iqbal said.
“Even though the district police chief has promised to protect the area’s Christians, the danger will always remain there,” he said. “Several cases have been registered against Mehr, but no action has been taken against him. In January this year, the police tried to arrest Mehr and his men in a murder case, but his supporters blocked three main highways for several hours, forcing the police to abandon action against him.”
Police sought Sattar in connection with the murder of Javed Masih, a Christian who had opposed Sattar in a 2008 election.
“The late Javed Masih used to tell the peasants to vote according to their conscience and not get intimidated by gangsters like Mehr,” Iqbal said. “His efforts bore fruit, and Mehr lost the general election in 2008. Unfortunately, Masih had to sacrifice his life for the cause, while several others were injured in an armed attack by Mehr’s men.”
In this month’s election, Iqbal likewise told Christians to vote for the person they thought best. Zaman belongs to the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, which has emerged as the single largest party in national and Punjab assemblies.
“The humiliating defeat further stoked anger in Mehr, and he’s now bent upon punishing us,” he said, adding that Sattar has targeted no Muslims for opposing him.
“Our application against Mehr Abdul Sattar is still pending with the police, but it seems more Christian blood will be shed before he is brought to justice,” Iqbal said. “But this will not deter us from using our right to vote. We refuse to give in to the tyranny of criminals like Mehr.”
Besides village 8/4-L, the threatened Christian areas in provincial constituency PP-191 are village 10/4-L, with an estimated Christian population of 3,000; 11/4-L, where 2,000 Christians live; and 26/4-L, in which around 1,000 Christians are settled.
The peasant land movement that became the issue of contention for Sattar arose more than 10 years ago in response to what Iqbal calls the Pakistan Army’s illegal occupation of 64,000 acres in some 10 districts of Punjab. Catholic Capuchins had relocated Christians to the area of central Punjab Province to provide dairy products to the British Army during World War II, and the British turned the land over to the Pakistan Army when the sub-continent was partitioned, Iqbal said.
“At the time of partition of the sub-continent, the Christians were not given the land rights which were promised to them by the Capuchin fathers,” he said. “Because of this, Christians are at the forefront of the peasants’ movement, which is facing the powerful Pakistan Army for their due right, as the Britons had handed over the lands to the Army after the partition.”
Sattar had initially worked with the peasant cause, he said.
“But then he began creating fissures in the movement, coaxing the Muslim members not to take directions from the Christian leadership,” Iqbal said. “He then left the movement and got involved in criminal activities, subsequently landing in politics. However, Mehr’s political career failed to take off because thousands of Christians of the area don’t vote for him.”
Muslims attack Christian village in Pakistan, murder Christian teenager (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
You: MQM being pushed against the wall: Sattar (nation.com.pk)
Christians vote for protection in Pakistan (dawn.com)
Khushpur Faisalabad Pakistan: Christian Muslim clashes leave 1 dead. (ireport.cnn.com)
Pakistan acquits Christian on death row (bigpondnews.com)
Allen West schools bobama what real courage is. Well, what can you expect from a president who likes Common Core.
Anti-Obama filmmaker charges harassment by IRS
Suspects feds gave bank information to ‘leftist journalist’
Published: 17 hours ago
Jerome R. Corsi About
Jerome R. Corsi, a Harvard Ph.D., is a WND senior staff reporter. He has authored many books, including No. 1 N.Y. Times best-sellers “The Obama Nation” and “Unfit for Command.” Corsi’s latest book is “Where’s the REAL Birth Certificate?”
NEW YORK – Amid disclosures of IRS harassment of conservatives, the maker of the controversial film “Dreams from My Real Father” now suspects he was the victim of tag-team harassment by the IRS and a leftist journalist apparently working in concert to intimidate him and his investors.
WND previously reported director Joel Gilbert was concerned a journalist investigating his documentary used information that could only have been obtained by hacking into his company’s bank account.
Gilbert now believes the confidential information supplied to the journalist could have come from a continuing IRS audit initiated in early 2012, possibly in retaliation for Gilbert’s documentary arguing Frank Marshall Davis is the president’s biological father, not the Kenyan Barack Obama.
Gilbert says the IRS in Los Angeles may have provided confidential information on his corporate financing to Seth Rosenfeld, a San Francisco-based reporter affiliated with the Soros-funded Center for Investigative Reporting. Rosenfeld, in turn, used the guise of writing a story as an excuse to telephone and confront Gilbert’s financial backers with details of their financial transactions recorded in Gilbert’s corporate bank accounts.
In an email to WND, Rosenfeld denied the IRS was the source of his information identifying Gilbert’s customers and investors and providing specification of their financial transactions as recorded in Gilbert’s corporate bank account.
In responding to questions posed by WND, Rosenfeld declined to disclose how he came to possess the detailed financial information he exhibited when telephoning Gilbert and various Gilbert customers and investors claiming he was researching a story.
Gilbert told WND he is meeting with legal counsel Monday to determine if he has a cause of civil or criminal legal action against the IRS and/or Rosenfeld.
In early 2012, the IRS reopened Gilbert’s 2009 tax return and denied all of his business expenses, even though they were well documented.
To resolve the issue, Gilbert’s accountant met the IRS auditor in Los Angeles.
“To our shock, the IRS agent who met with my accountant had a printout of the home page of the “Dreams from My Real Father” official film website on her desk,” Gilbert told WND.
Despite Gilbert resubmitting the 2009 expenses, the IRS has still not closed the case, with the next meeting between Gilbert’s account and the IRS set for next week.
The IRS spokesman in Los Angeles did not respond to a WND request for comment.
How did journalist know?
Gilbert began to suspect the IRS had distributed his information to left-leaning journalists when Rosenfeld telephoned him Oct. 26, 2012, near the end of the presidential campaign, and began citing specific deposits from Gilbert’s corporate bank account, asking Gilbert to explain the purpose of the deposits.
Rosenfeld is listed on the Center for Investigative Reporting website as a “correspondent,” suggesting he does not have a staff position with the organization.
The Center for Investigative Reporting did not respond to a WND request for comment.
“I was so shocked that Rosenfeld had my confidential bank information that I asked him to send me an email detailing his questions and hung up,” Gilbert said. “Not surprisingly, Rosenfeld never sent me the email I asked for.”
Next, Gilbert told WND, Rosenfeld called one of Gilbert’s corporation’s limited partners on his private telephone number, fraudulently introduced himself as being with the Romney campaign and asked for a campaign donation.
“When my business partner said he wasn’t interested, Rosenfeld admitted to being a reporter and began citing my partner’s confidential bank wiring history sending funds to my corporate account,” Gilbert explained. “My partner hung up on him.”
Next, Rosenfeld called the elderly mother of a Gilbert customer who had purchased a large number of “Dreams from My Real Father” DVDs and paid for them by check.
“Rosenfeld tricked the woman into giving out her son’s home phone number by pretending to be an old friend,” Gilbert continued. “When Rosenfeld called the customer, he cited the amount of the check and asked the customer about his political opinions. Not being satisfied at this, Rosenfeld asked if my customer could identify by name any others he knew had made similar large purchases of my DVD.”
Gilbert told WND he has documented that Rosenfeld contacted several of his customers on their private unlisted phone numbers, citing for them various payments or wire transfers to Gilbert’s corporate account. Rosenfeld asked the customers for their political opinions and whether or not the customers had made any campaign contributions to Republicans, including to presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
Gilbert told WND he now believes an IRS leak was the likely source of Rosenfeld’s information.
He also believes Rosenfeld’s phone calls, armed with specific records regarding customer transactions in Gilbert’s corporate banking account, has damaged his business.
“My private banking information was used to intimidate investors and purchasers of ‘Dreams from My Real Father,’ Gilbert told WND. “I could no longer in good conscience seek out new investors knowing that their transactions could not be kept private. I will be meeting with my attorneys this week in Los Angeles to discuss legal options and recourse.”
“It is true that as a freelance journalist I was researching a story about people who anonymously funded the distribution of the Joel Gilbert film that attacks President Obama, claims his election is a part of a vast communist conspiracy and displays pornographic photos of his mother,” Rosenfeld emailed WND in response to a request for comment.
Rosenfeld denied that he misrepresented himself or engaged in any improper or illegal conduct.
“I spoke with Gilbert twice on the phone and at his request sent him an email seeking his reply to my inquiry,” Rosenfeld continued. “He declined to comment in our phone conversations, did not call me back and did not respond to my email.”
Rosenfeld said he again sought comment from Gilbert by phone and email and never got a response.
Rosenfeld denied that he received any information concerning Gilbert’s corporate accounts from the IRS.
He also denied representing himself as being associated with the Romney campaign, and he denied asking any of Gilbert’s contacts for contributions to the Romney campaign.
Gilbert rejoined Rosenfeld’s charges, arguing that Rosenfeld’s negative characterization of “Dreams from My Real Father” raised the question of whether Rosenfeld had actually viewed the DVD.
“The response further reinforces my concern that Rosenfeld was recruited to do the dirty work, to intimidate me from continuing to market the firm, for political purposes on behalf of higher powers,” Gilbert said.
Gilbert told WND that he and the customers and investors Rosenfeld contacted have documented all phone calls and conversations for presentation in any legal proceedings that may occur.
“Rosenfeld and those who provided him with my private bank information should come clean now, because the story will only get bigger if they do not,” Gilbert threatened.
Gilbert believes the IRS and Rosenfeld targeted him for political reasons.
“Why didn’t Rosenfeld publish anything from his investigations into my film and my investors?” Gilbert asked.
“I believe I was targeted because ‘Dreams from My Real Father’ exposes Obama as a pathological liar,” he said. “Obama intentionally obscured a deeply disturbing family background in order to hide a Marxist agenda, completely incompatible with American values. It was an unacceptable manipulation of the electorate and unquestionably the biggest scandal in American history.”
He also believes the IRS and Rosenfeld may have been working together to intimidate investors and discredit his film by identifying him as a Republican Party operative.
“The fact that the IRS targeted me and Rosenfeld subsequently made his phone calls suggests to me they were working in concert, both equally afraid of the information in my film becoming public knowledge,” Gilbert charged.
“President Obama is not the son of a Kenyan goat herder who stands above politics. I demonstrated in my documentary that Obama is the child of Communist Party USA member and Soviet Agent Frank Marshall Davis. I also presented compelling evidence that Davis indoctrinated Obama into his Marxist ideology during his formative years.”
Gilbert believes Rosenfeld was not being sincere in his representation that he was writing an article but that his true intent was intimidation.
“The use of the Internal Revenue Service to intimidate Americans is criminal,” Gilbert asserted. “A conspiracy to deny the First Amendment rights of free speech to Americans is criminal.”
Gilbert’s documentary “Dreams from My Real Father” has been available at the WND Superstore since it was produced and also on Amazon.com and Netflix.
During the presidential campaign, WND reported Gilbert mailed more than 3 million free copies of the documentary to voters in swing states.
Fox News reported in May 2012 that the Center for Investigative Journalism has received close to $1 million from the George Soros-funded Open Society Foundation.
Gilbert is also producer of the 2012 award winning documentary “Atomic Jihad: Ahmadinejad’s Coming War and Obama’s Politics of Defeat.”
Rosenfeld is the author of the 2012 book “Subversives: The FBI’s War on Student Radicals, and Reagan’s Rise to Power.” In the book, he objects to what he characterizes as Ronald Reagan’s involvement for political purposes in a covert war the FBI waged in the 1960s against anti-war student radicals.
Ew. Dead baby. (bokertov.typepad.com)
For Birthers Only (bokertov.typepad.com)
White House Lied About Editing Benghazi Talking Points
Posted 05/16/2013 07:28 PM ET
Scandal In Libya: A new email dump shows that the White House, contrary to public statements, was heavily involved in editing the Benghazi talking points to remove all references to it being a terrorist attack.
The limited, heavily redacted package of emails released by the administration Wednesday is noteworthy for what the emails don’t say and reflect a concerted effort by the White House and State Department not to get at the truth but to put something together to help President Obama in an election two months out.
The email package begins some 67 hours after the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi. It does not discuss the infamous YouTube video that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice would refer to in her Sept. 16 foray on five Sunday talk shows or that President Obama would refer to six times in a Sept. 26 speech before the United Nations.
The video is mentioned only briefly in the subject line of emails coming out of an important meeting where further revisions were made.
The emails do show that Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes and National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor were alerted that the intelligence community was drafting talking points that as late as 3:04 p.m. on Friday, Sept. 14, still included references to extremists tied to al-Qaida and an “attack.”
The terms “al-Qaida” and “attack” were stripped out by 4:42 p.m., and shortly afterward Vietor thanked colleagues for revisions and said they would be vetted “here,” as in the White House. He then forwarded “edits” from John Brennan, the current CIA chief who then was a White House counterterrorism adviser (see editorial upper left).
As we’ve written, in a White House meeting on Saturday morning, Sept. 15, the CIA, at the direction of the State Department and White House, drafted the final version of the talking points from which all references to al-Qaida and security warnings in Benghazi prior to the attack had been deleted. Ambassador Rice was now ready for her close-up.
State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland — “Toria” to her friends, as the emails reveal — represented the department in the negotiations over Benghazi. She was concerned that the public would get the impression the Obama administration was warned about the potential for violence in Benghazi.
Nuland , who insisted throughout the process that the State Department’s concerns be addressed, worried in one email that references to terrorist involvement “could be abused by members (of Congress) to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency (CIA) warnings, so why do we want to feed that either?”
“I’m with Toria,” Democratic operative David Adams chimed in at one point. “The last bullet (point) especially will read to members like we had been repeatedly warned.”
In fact, the State Department was warned numerous times, including by Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who was murdered in the attack. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was told that night by Gregory Hicks, deputy chief of mission, that a terrorist attack, not a video protest, was under way.
The emails show that the FBI already concluded that al-Qaida (not just al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb) was involved. This information was kept from the American people as the administration claimed that eliminating such references was done to protect the FBI investigation.
That investigation was impeded, Hicks said, by Rice’s humiliation of the president of Libya on one talk show where he said Benghazi was a terrorist attack while she claimed it was provoked by the video.
So we have a collection of spokespersons and Democratic operatives conspiring with White House staff to edit talking points not to report how and why four Americans died but merely to make the Obama administration look good in the middle of a political campaign.
GOP not satisfied by Benghazi email release (news.yahoo.com)
Petraeus email objected to Benghazi talking points (timesofisrael.com)
GOP demands more despite Benghazi email release (cnsnews.com)
Report: Republicans were source of bogus Benghazi quotes (rawstory.com)
White House releases additional documents related to Benghazi response (firstread.nbcnews.com)
Newly Released Benghazi Emails Directly Contradict White House Claims (weeklystandard.com)
Congressmen: Were Conservative Car Dealers Targeted for GM Closures?
Two Congressmen are asking the Treasury Department if it inappropriately scrutinized conservative-owned businesses the same way it targeted Tea Party groups filing for tax-exempt status.
Republicans Mike Kelly (PA-03) and Jim Renacci (OH-16) circulated a letter Thursday requesting Treasury Secretary Jack Lew release documents detailing the process and methodology the Automotive Task Force used to shut down General Motors dealerships in 2009 during the automotive industry crisis.
Renacci’s Northeast Ohio Chevrolet dealership was closed in 2010 after losing a battle with General Motors. Congress loaned General Motors $50 billion in 2009 after declaring bankruptcy, which resulted in the federal government owning a majority share of the company. Roughly 2000 dealerships received “wind-down” agreements, and while hundreds were able to survive an exhaustive arbitration process, Renacci-Doraty Chevrolet in Wadsworth did not. Renacci, then a Congressional candidate challenging incumbent John Boccieri, placed the blame squarely on President Obama.
Did bias extend to targeting conservative companies? (breitbart.com)
Nassau gives tax breaks to Chevy dealer (newsday.com)
The Clinton Scandal Playbook and Benghazi
May 17, 2013 By
The Clinton Scandal Playbook and Benghazi (frontpagemag.com)
Hillary Clinton Willfully Disregarded Security Needs in Benghazi (adamgladhill.com)
Rand Paul: Benghazi Should End Hillary Clinton (conservativeread.com)
The Benghazi Emails: What Do They Show? (powerlineblog.com)
Pat Smith, Mother Of Benghazi Victim, Blames Hillary Clinton (Video) (opposingviews.com)
MSNBC Censors Jon Stewart – deletes references to Bill Ayers, firing drones and praying at a Mosque
Jon Stewart Destroys Obama Over The IRS Scandal (businessinsider.com)
Jon Stewart Calls The Media ‘Concussed Goldfish’ Over Fruitless Speculation About 2016 (businessinsider.com)
Jon Stewart’s Lesson On Trust (ethicsalarms.com)
Jon Stewart blasts Obama over AP, IRS scandals (washingtontimes.com)
Bill Ayers and His Media Groupies (canadafreepress.com)
Bill Ayers responds to Illinois’ John Ruberry? (illinoisreview.typepad.com)
The first high-profile hearing on the IRS scandal is being held today before the House Ways and Means Committee, which oversees the IRS. Lawmakers in both chambers are seeking answers about why they weren’t told that the IRS had singled out conservative groups for scrutiny despite multiple inquiries in recent years.The hearing is the first of several sessions in coming weeks in which lawmakers will grill current and former officials about the IRS’s screening practices.
9:43 amJosh Hicks
Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) asked Miller what corrective actions the IRS had taken to ensure improper targeting of tax-exempt applicants does not happen again.
Miller responded that the agency provided verbal counseling for “the person we thought, at the time, to be responsible for the listing.” Earlier, he told committee chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.) that he did not know who was responsible for establishing the inappropriate search criteria.
Addressing discrepancies in his statements and a look of disbelief from Camp, Miller explained that IRS officials eventually determined that the person in question might not be the one responsible for the targeting, and that the agency eventually held a meeting with all managers in the determinations division to walk them through the appropriate processes for reviewing tax-exemption applications.
9:42 am Ed O’Keefe
After almost two hours, the House Ways and Means Committee will recess briefly while members go vote on legislation under consideration by the full House.
Members have occupied their seats along the dais for most of the morning, suggesting that virtually everyone intends to spend at least a few moments probing Steven Miller and J. Russell George.
Our updates will resume when the panel returns.
9:24 amJosh Hicks
Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) said there’s a difference between “stupid mistakes” and “malicious mistakes.” He said IRS examiners took a shortcut that “they deeply regret” by singling out groups for their policy positions instead of their activities.
McDermott noted that the Inspector General’s report found no political motivation behind the establishment of search criteria that targeted “tea party” and other conservative groups. He asked the IG, J. Russell George, to confirm.
9:19 amEd O’Keefe
Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) pushed Steven Miller to explain why he resigned as acting head of the IRS if, as he’s said repeatedly during the hearing, he didn’t know details of the scandal enveloping his former employer, or didn’t do anything wrong.
“I never said I didn’t do anything wrong, Mr. Nunes,” Miller replied.
“I resigned, because … what happens at the IRS, whether it was involved or not, stops at my desk. I should be held accountable,” he said.
8:56 amEd O’Keefe
Rep. Charles Boustany (R-La.) attempted to get former IRS Acting Commissioner Steven Miller to admit that his former boss, former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, knowingly lied to Congress.
Boustany played video of Shulman telling lawmakers that the IRS hadn’t targeted conservative-leaning groups.
Under questioning, Miller said that Shulman’s statement was “incorrect, but not untruthful.”
“When you talk about targeting, it’s a pejorative term,” Miller told the committee. He noted that during the time in question, the Supreme Court had just considered the Citizens United case that granted more freedoms to political groups and that there was general concern that some groups might be seeking social welfare tax-exempt status despite conducting political activities.
But Boustany seized on what Miller said about Shulman being “incorrect, but not untruthful.”
“To my knowledge, I don’t believe he knew at the time,” about targeting, Miller said of Shulman.
Shulman was appointed to lead the IRS in March 2008 by George W. Bush and stepped down in November.
8:54 amJosh Hicks
Miller said the reviews of tax-exemption applicants were mainly handled by staff at the “determinations” unit in Cincinnati, but also by “a hundred or so people who report into Cincinnati” as well.
A previous Washington Post article showed that the reviews extended beyond Cincinnati, to offices in D.C. and California. Miller’s comment confirms what Juliet Eilperin reported.
8:41 amEd O’Keefe
President Obama moved Thursday to install new leadership atop the Internal Revenue Service, tapping Danny Werfel to lead the scandal-plagued agency.
So who is Werfel? Where did he work before? Make sure to read our profile of him published in Friday’s Washington Post:
Werfel, 42, rose through the ranks at the Office of Management and Budget and the Justice Department as a budget analyst and lawyer before Obama tapped him to serve as OMB controller in 2009. As controller he was responsible for the government’s financial management, contracting, information technology and personnel policy.
Now he has the unenviable task of overhauling the IRS, which is reeling after admitting that employees aggressively targeted certain groups applying for tax-exempt status. Werfel will serve as acting director through Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year, the White House said.
Werfel may be well liked by colleagues at the OMB and the White House, but some lawmakers seemed skeptical or said they didn’t know much about him.
Read our full profile here.
8:31 amJosh Hicks
The Treasury Department’s Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George tells the committee the IRS asked for donor information from the groups it targeted for extra scrutiny.
He said the IRS reported to his office that it had destroyed the donor information after realizing it wasn’t supposed to collect such information from tax-exemption applicants.
8:26 amEd O’Keefe
Former IRS Acting Commissioner Steven Miller apologized to lawmakers Friday for the scandal that led to his ouster.
“First and foremost, as acting commissioner, I want to apologize on behalf of the Internal Revenue Service,” he told the panel.
“The affected organizations and the American public deserve better,” Miller said later, adding that “Partisanship has no place at the IRS.”
“I do not believe that partisanship motivated the people that engaged in the practices described in the inspector general’s report,” he said.
So then why did they do it?
“Foolish mistakes were made by people who were trying to be more efficient in their work,” he concluded.
8:22 amEd O’Keefe
<script height=”293px” width=”520px” src=”http://player.ooyala.com/iframe.js#pbid=336bd638bbee4ff393f4f71598a17afa&ec=J3aWVwYjr36tPOrPP3izkLT2Qc9SzKfj”></script>
Top IRS officials in Washington first learned of the tax-exempt office’s targeting of conservative-leaning groups in June 2011, while others didn’t learn about it until April or May of last year, according to a federal watchdog.
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration J. Russell George verbally laid out for the committee his office’s findings, saying that IRS officials used “inappropriate criteria” to probe these groups.
“The criteria included the words ‘tea party,’ ‘Patriot,” or ’9/12 Project,’” George said. “Another listed criterion was that the group’s issues included government spending, government debt or taxes. Yet another listed criterion appeared as education of the public by advocacy or lobbying to, quote, ‘Make America a better place to live.’ Finally, the criterion consisted of any statements in the case file criticizing how the country is being run,” George said.
“The reason that these criteria were inappropriate is that they did not focus on tax-exempt laws and Treasury Regulations,” he added. “For example, 501(C)(3) organizations may not engage in political campaign intervention. 501(C)(4) organizations can, but it must not be their primary activity. Political campaign intervention is action taken on behalf of, or against, a particular candidate running for office.”
“According to our findings, the first time that executives from Washington, D.C. became aware of the use of these criteria was June 2011, with some executives not becoming aware of the criteria until April or May 2012,” he said later.
Read George’s full oral statement below, as provided by TIGTA: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/05/17/hearing-on-irs-scandal-live-updates/#liveblog-entry-41777
IG On IRS Scandal: ‘Clear Evidence’ of Wrongdoing (cnsnews.com)
Live: House Hearing on IRS Targeting (drudge.com)
Congress grills top IRS official (wnd.com)
by blazingcatfur 1 year ago
Even though the video is a year old, it remains contemporary due to the continued Islamic, ass-kissing by this administration!
VIDEO: Pamela Geller on Michael Coren SUN TV on First Amendement win (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
VIDEO: Pamela Geller on SUN TV’s Michael Coren Show, Islam in Germany (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
Media Advisory: Pamela Geller on The Michael Coren, SUN TV (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
IRS Office That Targeted Tea Party Also Disclosed Confidential Docs From Conservative Groups
The same IRS office that deliberately targeted conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status in the run-up to the 2012 election released nine pending confidential applications of conservative groups to ProPublica late last year.
The IRS did not respond to requests Monday following up about that release, and whether it had determined how the applications were sent to ProPublica.
On Friday, Lois Lerner, the head of the division on tax-exempt organizations, apologized to Tea Party and other conservative groups because the IRS’ Cincinnati office had unfairly targeted them. Tea Party groups had complained in early 2012 that they were being sent overly intrusive questionnaires in response to their applications.
That scrutiny appears to have gone beyond Tea Party groups to applicants saying they wanted to educate the public to “make America a better place to live” or that criticized how the country was being run, according to a draft audit cited by many outlets. The full audit, by the Treasury Department’s inspector general for tax administration, will reportedly be released this week. (ProPublica was not contacted by the inspector general’s office.) (UPDATE May 14: The audit has been released.)
Before the 2012 election, ProPublica devoted months to showing how dozens of social-welfare nonprofits had misled the IRS about their political activity on their applications and tax returns. Social-welfare nonprofits are allowed to spend money to influence elections, as long as their primary purpose is improving social welfare. Unlike super PACs and regular political action committees, they do not have to identify their donors.
In 2012, nonprofits that didn’t have to report their donors poured an unprecedented $322 million into the election. Much of that money — 84 percent — came from conservative groups.
As part of its reporting, ProPublica regularly requested applications from the IRS’s Cincinnati office, which is responsible for reviewing applications from nonprofits.
Social welfare nonprofits are not required to apply to the IRS to operate. Many politically active new conservative groups apply anyway. Getting IRS approval can help with donations and help insulate groups from further scrutiny. Many politically active new liberal nonprofits have not applied.
Applications become public only after the IRS approves a group’s tax-exempt status.
On Nov. 15, 2012, ProPublica requested the applications of 67 nonprofits, all of which had spent money on the 2012 elections. (Because no social welfare groups with Tea Party in their names spent money on the election, ProPublica did not at that point request their applications. We had requested the Tea Party applications earlier, after the groups first complained about being singled out by the IRS. In response, the IRS said it could find no record of the tax-exempt status of those groups — typically how it responds to requests for unapproved applications.)
Liberal Organization With Ties To George Soros Got Documents From IRS (freedomoutpost.com)
George Soros funded ProPublica ties to IRS attacks on tea party and patriot groups (theglobaldispatch.com)
Lib Group: Irs Gave Us Conservative Groups’ Confidential Docs… (breitbart.com)
IRS released confidential info on conservative groups to ProPublica (washingtonpost.com)
Chilling Effect (freebeacon.com)
IRS to pro-life group: Send letter pledging not to protest Planned Parenthood to get your tax exemption
posted at 10:41 am on May 16, 2013 by Ed Morrissey
The Inspector General of the Treasury reported this week that the IRS began applying extra scrutiny and conducting harassment of Obama administration opponents as early as March 2010. However, for at least two pro-life groups, that scrutiny appears to have started a year earlier. Joel Gehrke reports that one group was told its tax-exempt application depended not on promising to stay out of electoral politics, but on pledging not to protest Planned Parenthood — a prominent supporter of Barack Obama:
IRS officials refused to grant tax exempt status two pro-life organizations because of their position on the abortion issue, according to a non-profit law firm, which said that one group was pressured not to protest a pro-choice organization that endorsed President Obama during the last election.
“In one case, the IRS withheld approval of an application for tax exempt status for Coalition for Life of Iowa. In a phone call to Coalition for Life of Iowa leaders on June 6, 2009, the IRS agent ‘Ms. Richards’ told the group to send a letter to the IRS with the entire board’s signatures stating that, under perjury of the law, they do not picket/protest or organize groups to picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood,” the Thomas More Society announced today. “Once the IRS received this letter, their application would be approved.”
Most have assumed that the obstructionism on the application from conservative groups came because the IRS assumed that they would get involved in politics, but the laws on 501(c)4s don’t prohibit that, as Mary Katharine explained yesterday. Their purpose and work has to be primarily for “social welfare,” but that can take on any number of forms. (MTS: Anyone remember ACORN? JM)
IRS Told Pro-Life Group Not to Picket Planned Parenthood (radio.foxnews.com)
IRS harassment of pro-life groups (patheos.com)
IRS Victims Include Pro-Life Advocates, As Congress Investigates (albanytribune.com)
IRS faces class action lawsuit over theft of 60 million medical records
California HIPAA-covered entity sues big time
SAN DIEGO | March 15, 2013
The Internal Revenue Service is now facing a class action lawsuit over allegations that it improperly accessed and stole the health records of some 10 million Americans, including medical records of all California state judges.
According to a report by Courthousenews.com, an unnamed HIPAA-covered entity in California is suing the IRS, alleging that some 60 million medical records from 10 million patients were stolen by 15 IRS agents. The personal health information seized on March 11, 2011, included psychological counseling, gynecological counseling, sexual/drug treatment and other medical treatment data. “This is an action involving the corruption and abuse of power by several Internal Revenue Service agents,” the complaint reads. “No search warrant authorized the seizure of these records; no subpoena authorized the seizure of these records; none of the 10,000,000 Americans were under any kind of known criminal or civil investigation and their medical records had no relevance whatsoever to the IRS search. IT personnel at the scene, a HIPPA facility warning on the building and the IT portion of the searched premises, and the company executives each warned the IRS agents of these privileged records,” it continued. According to the case, the IRS agents had a search warrant for financial data pertaining to a former employee of the John Doe company, however, “it did not authorize any seizure of any healthcare or medical record of any persons, least of all third parties completely unrelated to the matter,” the complaint read. The class action lawsuit against the IRS seeks $25,000 in compensatory damages “per violation per individual” in addition to punitive damages for constitutional violations. Thus, compensatory damages could start at a minimum of $250 billion. This story will be updated.
IRS seizes 60 million medical records without a warrant (americanthinker.com)
The IRS Raids 60 Million Personal Medical Records (forbes.com)
IRS sued for stealing the medical records of 10 million Americans (humanevents.com)
IRS Faces Lawsuit After Stealing 60 Million Medical Records (blacklistednews.com)
WND by BOB UNRUH (MY TWO SENSE: The IRS is not only intruding into the lives and actions of Conservative groups and individuals, it is dictating, and punishing the course of their thinking, their beliefs, and their ability to reach others in an unprecedented way! Not only is this unprecedented, it is the most oppressive Communistic governmental force EVER seen in America, including the British monarchy era. The Revolutionary War was fought to disengage from that oppression. The White House is not the only area of concern relating to these criminal behaviors. The Democrat Senate also requested the IRS to target the groups and individuals. This is not the first time the IRS has been used to intimidate, harass, and detain citizens who disagree with this administration, however, this time it is much worse. And that’s how it happens. A horrible crime is committed—next someone in the near, or distant future, commits the same crime, but it is more horrendous than the one before. That’s human nature, and man will invariably sink to the very bottom of debauchery and corruption without fail when society reaches a point at which bad isn’t perceived as all that bad—corrupt isn’t all that corrupt—and evil is all that evil . JUST ME)
James Dobson confirms slam campaign against his group
Family Talk founder says IRS targeted ‘tea party,’ ‘Constitution’ and ‘Christian’
Published: 13 hours ago
Bob Unruh About
The Internal Revenue Service campaign that put a bull’s-eye on “tea party” groups and those with “Constitution” or “patriot” in their name also took a swipe at Christians.
That was confirmed today when Dr. James Dobson, whose has served as an adviser to presidents and now runs Dr. James Dobson’s FamilyTalk, said his organization’s status was threatened because it didn’t present “all views.”
Dobson has been an outspoken lightning rod standing up for Christian values for decades as an author, broadcaster, speaker and adviser. He has written more than 30 books including, “The New Dare to Discipline,” “Love for a Lifetime,” “Life on the Edge,” “Love Must Be Tough,” “The New Strong-Willed Child,” Bringing Up Boys,” “Bringing Up Girls” and “Head Over Heels.”
He was an associate clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of Southern California School of Medicine for 14 years and on the attending staff of Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles for 17 years.
He has advised three U.S. presidents on family matters, and holds 17 honorary doctoral degrees. In 2008 he was inducted into the National Radio Hall of Fame and recently he received the “Great American Award” from The Awakening.
In a statement released through his FamilyTalk Action headquarters in Colorado Springs, it was confirmed the organization was set up two years ago “for the purpose of spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ, of providing Christ-oriented advice and education to parents and children; and of speaking to cultural issues that affect the family.”
The group’s Form 1024 was filed with the IRS requesting 501(c)4 status, which is a nonprofit status but with permission to comment on political issues. Its contributions and donations are not tax deductible to donors. It is not the same status as the ministry itself, where donations are tax deductible, and the arrangement represents a common setup for ministries that want to engage in limited political activity on issues such as marriage, family, abortion, same-sex “marriage,” civil rights and freedom.
FamilyTalk Action said, “The attorney completing this form had submitted scores of similar applications over his 26-year career with none being rejected. In January and February 2013, Family Talk Action’s counsel called the IRS reviewing agent, R. Medley (ID no. 52402), to inquire regarding when there would be a determination of the application. Her voice mail box was full on each of these calls so no message could be left. On March 6, he called Ms. Medley again and got routed to her voice mail again. This time, he was able to leave a voice mail message and requested a return call.
“Ms. Medley did not call back until March 19. Family Talk Action’s attorney asked her when the IRS would issue its determination letter. Ms. Medley responded saying, I don’t think your Form 1024 (application for exemption) will be granted because Family Talk Action is ‘not educational’ because it does not present all views. She continued, saying that Family Talk Action sounded like a ‘partisan right-wing group’ because, according to Ms. Medley, it only presents conservative viewpoints. She then added, ‘you’re political’ because you ‘criticized President Obama, who was a candidate.’”
The organization said it had submitted sample radio programs after the IRS had demanded them, although none was aired during an election year.
“It was the opinion of Family Talk Action’s legal counsel that these samples were not only 501(c)(4) qualified but 501(c)(3) qualified,” the statement said.
“Family Talk Action’s legal counsel had never heard an IRS agent express biased statements like those he heard during the March 19 call. He also felt that the this agent did not understand the difference between 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) entities,” the report said.
“The American people deserve better treatment from its government than this. Christian ministries and others supporting the family must not be silenced or intimidated by the IRS or other branches of the government,” Dobson said.
President Obama fired the acting commissioner of the IRS today over the war against conservatives and Christians, members of Congress demanded that all those responsible lose their jobs and it has been revealed that nearly 500 groups were targeted in the “don’t-disagree-with-Obama” effort.
Documentation suggests the attacks started as early as 2010, shortly after Obamacare, which now is mandating that Christians in business violate their faith and pay for abortifacients, was adopted.
IRS Subjects Dr. James Dobson And Family Talk Action To Viewpoint Discrimination (albanytribune.com)
IRS Discriminated Against Dr. James Dobson, Family Talk (americanclarion.com)
Rejecting the Founders (americanclarion.com)
The Most Important Question for America (americanclarion.com)
I Am The Face Of The Obama IRS Attacks (personalliberty.com)
Another IRS scandal: agents illegally seized 60 million medical records (illinoisreview.typepad.com)
THE BLAZE by BECKET ADAMS (MY TWO SENSE: Julian Bond must have had several strokes to make him this bitter and mean! His comments calling Conservatives equal to “Taliban wing of American politics,” in other words, Jihadis, which clearly shows his true feelings about the white race. I’m not discounting black conservatives, for I know full well there are many. However, Bond discounts those black people as Uncle Toms, so we all know Bond is referring to whites. So much bigotry and so much hatred, I haven’t seen since bobama turned his back on Israel. JM)
Here’s Why This NAACP Official Thinks It’s Good the IRS Targeted Tea Party Groups (Hint: It Involves the Taliban)
May. 14, 2013 4:07pm
Julian Bond, chairman emeritus of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), said Tuesday that he supports the Internal Revenue Service’s political targeting of Tea Party groups because “they are the Taliban wing of American politics.”
And he doesn’t think the comparison is in any way unfair or over the top.
Bond’s Taliban remarks were made in response to a question posed by MSNBC’s Thomas Roberts.
Roberts noted that the NAACP official was outraged in 2004 when his organization came under heavy IRS scrutiny.
“[I]n ’04, Congressman Charlie Rangel called the audit a police state tactic. Do you think that there might be a double standard being looked at here?” Roberts asked.
“No, I don’t think there’s a double standard at all. I think it’s entirely legitimate to look at the Tea Party. Here are a group of people who are admittedly racist,” Bond replied.
Oh, good grief.
The Tea Party is “overtly political” and has tried its best “to harm President Obama in every way,” Bond continued. “I don’t think there are correct parallels between those two incidents.”
“It was wrong for the IRS to behave in this heavy handed manner. They didn’t explain it well before or now what they’re doing and why they’re doing it. But there are no parallels between these two,” he added.
Roberts asked Bond whether the IRS scandal will lead to Tea Party victories in the 2014 midterm elections.
“I hope not,” Bond said. “I hope they don’t get any more air. They are the Taliban wing of American politics. We all ought to be a little worried about them.”
Yep, just like a terrorist organization.
“Sir, do you think that’s a little harsh, calling them the Taliban wing of American politics?” Roberts asked.
“Not at all. The truth may hurt, but it’s the truth,” Bond responded, smugly confident in his comparison:
Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter
(H/T: Washington Free Beacon). This post has been updated.
- (Outrageous Video) NAACP Chairman: “Legitimate” For IRS To Target “Overtly Racist” Tea Party… (redflagnews.com)
- NAACP Chair Emeritus: ‘Legitimate’ For IRS To Target ‘Admittedly Racist’ Tea Party: ‘Taliban Wing’ Of Politics (mediaite.com)
- Here’s Why This NAACP Official Thinks It’s Good the IRS Targeted Tea Party Groups (Hint: It Involves the Taliban) (theblaze.com)
- NAACP Chair: Tea Party Is ‘Taliban Wing’ Of American Politics (freebeacon.com)
- Watch: Fmr. NAACP chair calls Tea Party groups ‘Taliban wing of American politics’ (tv.msnbc.com)
- Former NAACP Chair: Targeting Tea Party ‘Perfectly Legitimate’ Because They’re ‘Taliban Wing of American Politics’ (nationalreview.com)
- Former NAACP Chair Julian Bond Calls Tea Party Loyalists ‘Taliban Wing of American Politics’ (opposingviews.com)
Holder to House Committee: I Don’t Really Know Anything About AP Scandal (And I’m Not Sure When I Recused Myself)
May. 15, 2013 6:29pm
Attorney General Eric Holder appeared for the sixth time before the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday, asked to speak about the IRS’ admission that it has been targeting conservative organizations and the Department of Justice secretly seizing two months of phone records from the Associated Press.
Unfortunately, though, Holder divulged almost nothing.
The attorney general’s opening statement consisted of an overview of the Department of Justice’s “achievements” and “priorities,” before saying they could be “threatened” by budget cuts related to sequestration.
But in response to repeated questions by Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va) about the DOJ seizing phone records from the Associated Press, Holder said: “I was not the person involved in that decision…I am not familiar why the subpoena was constructed in the way it was because I was not involved in the case…” etc. He also often noted that there is an ongoing investigation that prevents him from commenting.
Lawmakers then attempted to determine who authorized the subpoena if not Holder, and the attorney general said he would “assume” that the deputy attorney general did after he recused himself from the case, and received confirmation during the hearing that Deputy Attorney General James Cole indeed did authorize the subpoenas.
Representative Spencer Bachus (R-AL) was one of the lawmakers to glean some new information from the attorney general.
While we know Holder has recused himself from the case, Bachus’ questions reveal that apparently Holder doesn’t know when exactly he did so.
“On what date did you recuse yourself?” Bachus asked.
“I’m not sure, I think it was towards the beginning of the matter,” Holder responded.
“Isn’t that sort of an unacceptable procedure? The statue says that the attorney general shall approve the subpoena. There was no memorandum, no email — when you recused yourself, was it in writing, was it orally? Did you tell someone, did you alert the White House?” Bachus probed.
“I would’ve told the deputy attorney general,” Holder replied, though he said there would be no record of it in writing.
Holder said the FBI’s criminal investigation of the IRS could feasibly include civil rights violations, false statements and potential violations of the Hatch Act, though he couldn’t say by or for whom.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) was particularly disturbed by Holder’s actions, saying “the actions of the department have, in fact, impaired the First Amendment.” To this, as with the rest, Holder provided a limited explanation.
Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI) was one of several lawmakers to suggest Holder and other administration officials travel to the Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and reflect on the phrase “the buck stops here.”
Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) held up a picture of Tyrone Woods, one of the four Americans killed in Benghazi, then a photo of Brian Terry, a U.S. border patrol agent killed with an illegal gun tied to Operation Fast and Furious, asking whether there was anything the government could have done to prevent the loss of life.
When Holder prevaricated, Forbes grew agitated and said the only way we can prevent equal corruption in our health care system is for our personal health information never to be sent to the IRS in the first place. Because once the government inevitably overreaches, there is a clear precedent that no one will be held accountable.
Holder caught lying again: No Written Recusal on AP Phone Record Seizure (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
Holder Removed Himself From Decision To Subpoena AP (huffingtonpost.com)
AG Holder Recused Himself in AP Toll Records Case (talkleft.com)
Holder recused himself from leaks investigation, announces IRS probe (nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com)
CNN Refutes Major Part of ABC’s Bombshell Benghazi Report…But Is There an Explanation?
May. 15, 2013 8:24am
CNN has refuted a key point of last week’s bombshell ABC News report about the edits to the Benghazi talking points — specifically, the role of a key White House figure wanting to protect the State Department’s interests.
CNN’s Jake Tapper obtained an email from then-Deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes that contains no mention of the State Department.
Here’s the relevant portion of the email CNN obtained:
“Sorry to be late to this discussion. We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation.
There is a ton of wrong information getting out into the public domain from Congress and people who are not particularly informed. Insofar as we have firmed up assessments that don’t compromise intel or the investigation, we need to have the capability to correct the record, as there are significant policy and messaging ramifications that would flow from a hardened mis-impression.”
And here’s what ABC reported Rhodes wrote:
“We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don’t want to undermine the FBI investigation. We thus will work through the talking points tomorrow morning at the Deputies Committee meeting.”
Separately, The Weekly Standard similarly reported that Rhodes “responded to the group, explaining that [then-State Department spokeswoman Victoria] Nuland had raised valid concerns and advising that the issues would be resolved at a meeting of the National Security Council’s Deputies Committee the following morning.”
Tapper, who previously worked at ABC, reports that “whoever provided those accounts seemingly invented the notion that Rhodes wanted the concerns of the State Department specifically addressed.”
ABC’s Jonathan Karl responded to Tapper’s report Tuesday by saying he quoted verbatim a source who had seen the original emails but was not permitted to make copies of them.
Karl said he contacted his source, who said that Rhodes’ reply “was after a long chain of email about State Dept concerns. So when WH emailer says, take into account all equities, he is talking about the State equities, since that is what the email chain was about.”
Karl noted that the White House has refused multiple requests to release the full email exchange, which would clear up the confusion.
According to ABC’s initial report, the widely-discredited talking points used by United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice in the days after the Benghazi attack underwent 12 edits, including removing references to an Al-Qaeda affiliated group and that the CIA had previously warned about a terror threat.
Who doctored a White House email? (salon.com)
CNN: ABC’s Bombshell Benghazi Report Is Wrong (businessinsider.com)
Hey Obamabots, Tapper’s “Leak” Is Meaningless (leatherpenguin.com)
Was Jake Tapper played by White House through selective leak of just one email? (legalinsurrection.com)
Wait Until You See the Media Matters Talking Points on the DOJ/AP Story That Even Made HuffPost Say ‘Wow’
May. 15, 2013 9:08am
The left-leaning Media Matters actually put out talking points for those who want to defend the Justice Department for secretly obtaining two months’ worth of Associated Press phone records.
The Media Matters Action Network, the lobbying arm of Media Matters for America, said the situation “raises important questions about the balance between a free press and effective national security,” but that the talking points were “for those interested in pushing back against partisan attacks.”
Here are some of the key points Media Matters offers (including mentions of the Bush administration):
• If the press compromised active counter-terror operations for a story that only tipped off the terrorists, that sounds like it should be investigated.
• It was not acceptable when the Bush Administration exposed Valerie Plame working undercover to stop terrorists from attacking us. It is not acceptable when anonymous sources do it either.
• Did Republicans in Congress who are now exploiting the situation to score political points oppose the media shield law that likely would have protected the Associated Press in this situation?
• For a flashback to the Valerie Plame affair, which involved the Bush Administration revealing classified information about Valerie Plame’s CIA employment with the media and led to the exposure and endangerment of her overseas sources, click here for a rundown of the key players and here for a timeline.
This was the Huffington Post’s response:
This is what the talking points look like:
Why Does Media Matters Have Tax Exempt Status? (iowntheworld.com)
WPost Revives Its Plame-gate Smear (consortiumnews.com)
‘No Trust’: How Does the IRS ‘Inquisition’ Impact ObamaCare?
May. 15, 2013 11:41am
As the “IRS Inquisition” scandal unfolds, some are pointing out that the government agency is on the verge of not only having purview over your finances, but your health care as well.
Rush Limbaugh has theorized that this is one of the the reasons the administration and traditionally left-leaning members of the media have denounced the scandal so strongly. The IRS must be seen to have made a mistake and been set right, so it can proceed at full strength for the implementation of “Obamacare.”
Stuart Varney appeared on Fox News this morning to discuss just how much the IRS will have control over with the complete implementation of the president’s health care overhaul.
“The IRS will be the policing agent for Obamacare,” Varney said. “You’re going to have to, on your next tax return, you’re going to have to report to the IRS personal health care information…Do you trust the IRS with your personal health care information?”
Host Martha MacCullum continued: “It’s such a dangerous and slippery slope when [their] credibility is brought into question, because they of course know what you make…And now they are supposed to marry that information…with whether you are eligible for a healthcare subsidy. And that raises questions, too, because you’ve got to keep them posted on every change that may lap in our employment picture.”
Varney interjected to say that’s not even the full picture.
“Your doctor is going to put on file electronically your entire medical history,” he said. “At the same time, on a parallel path, the IRS wants to know about your health insurance. There is no wall between those two areas of information. And bearing in mind what they have done politically there is no trust that they won’t jump that wall and go into your personal medical history….And that’s where the lack of trust comes in.”
MacCallum noted that, when the bill was being passed, we were repeatedly assured that privacy and having your records online wouldn’t be an issue.
“But people have been scanning documents for catch words, you wonder what they’re going to scan in terms of health care and health records. It’s a legitimate question given all of this,” she concluded.
Varney concluded his remarks by saying the way things are heading now, the scandal may delay the implementation of Obamacare.
ThinkProgress reacted to the segment barely an hour it was posted, frantic that the reputation of the IRS may be tarnished.
“In reality, there is no evidence that the impropriety in the IRS office responsible for granting tax-exempt status to social welfare groups has bled over into other parts of the agency,” they wrote both reassuringly and inaccurately.
IRS scandal makes Obamacare even scarier (rare.us)
How the IRS Scandal Threatens Obamacare (reason.com)
THE IRS SCANDAL AND OBAMACARE: Yes, Your Private Health Information Will Be Used Against You (directorblue.blogspot.com)
The two reasons the IRS MUST be ripped out of Obamacare (floppingaces.net)
Palin: ‘Corrupt’ IRS Also Tasked with Enforcing Obamacare (breitbart.com)
The IRS Targeting Scandal Could Disrupt Obamacare (businessinsider.com)
Newt ties IRS scandal to Obamacare (politico.com)
See Some of the Outrageous Requests the IRS Made to Tea Party Groups
May. 15, 2013 10:48am
Conservative groups targeted by the the Internal Revenue Service were ordered to provide copies of their websites, social media postings, donor lists and much more in the still-emerging IRS scandal.
Politico reviewed documents from 11 such organizations and found they were asked deeply probing inquiries, including for one group, the “minutes of all board meetings since your creation.”
“They were asking for a U-Haul truck’s worth of information,” Toby Marie Walker, president of the Waco Tea Party, told Politico. Her group was asked for copies of all its newsletters, any stories written about them, and transcripts of radio shows where they mentioned any political candidates by name.
The American Patriots Against Government Excess was asked for summaries of all material passed out during meetings. They had been reading the U.S. Constitution; the group’s president mailed in a copy.
The inquiries were all in the name of the organizations’ applications for tax-exempt status, yet the process for many stretched out for more than a year and a half.
Other groups were asked whether they had any tie to the Koch brothers-backed anti-tax organization Americans for Prosperity. The Liberty Township Tea Party was asked whether they knew a former leader of the Cincinnati Tea Party. That former leader, Justin Binik-Thomas, said he never worked with the Liberty group and has no idea why there were lumped together — though is worried now about being on the IRS’s radar.
“Will my personal taxes get audited? Will my small-business taxes get audited? Am I a pawn to try to get at another group?” Binik-Thomas said to Politico. “There are a lot of people involved in the Tea Party. Why was I isolated from thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people? Why was I singled out?”
One conservative group, Linchpins of Liberty in Franklin, Tenn., gives talks to students. Founder and president Kevin Kookogey said the IRS wanted the names of everyone his group trained.
“Can you imagine my responsibility to parents if I disclosed the names of their children to the IRS?” Kookogey told the Daily Mail. He said the very thought “should send chills through your spine that the government would ask me to identify those I teach, and to provide details of what I teach them.”
The IRS wants YOU – to share everything – Politico (politico.com)
Morning Bell: The IRS Wants to Know If You’re a “Patriot” (heritage.org)
Franklin conservative group says it was targeted by IRS (bizjournals.com)
Franklin Graham: Irs Targeted Us, Too… (politico.com)
Graham believes BGEA among conservative groups targeted by IRS (charlotte.news14.com)
Obama Administration Under Siege From 3 Huge Scandals: Here’s Why It Could All Come Crashing Down
May. 14, 2013 8:52am
In just one week, President Barack Obama’s political machine has switched from endless campaign to survival mode. And for the first time in Obama’s presidency, the damage to his regime may be permanent.
Three revelations have come together like an avalanche. First, there was a Benghazi hearing that proved beyond any reasonable doubt that this administration is feckless, dishonest, and cravenly politicized. But in its aftermath on Friday, an executive branch information dump dropped another bombshell: the IRS does indeed target and intimidate conservative groups.
This appalling admission from a senior IRS official was obviously meant to slide into the news cycle and dissipate over the weekend. This unseemly public relations gambit has become a hallmark of the Obama approach to all issues, regardless of their importance to the nation. Deny or delay, spin and win.
And, to the discredit of our electorate, it has worked—until perhaps now.
As the country was still reeling from the gut-wrenching testimony of three Benghazi whistleblowers and the IRS mea culpa, yet another log was thrown onto the bonfire of the Obama administration’s credibility. Yesterday the Associated Press broke a news story that Obama’s Justice Department collected phone data on dozens of AP reporters as part of a national security leak investigation.
Such sweeping intrusion upon a news organization’s privacy—exposing all its sources and chilling all speech in the process—makes a mockery of the Constitution’s guarantee of not “abridging the freedom of speech.” We can now add the First Amendment to the butcher’s bill of Obama administration overreach and nascent autocracy.
These three scandals have encircled the Obama administration. They threaten to turn the President’s second term into an ongoing partisan dogfight as the GOP pushes for answers that could trigger investigations, resignations—yes, possibly even impeachment, depending on what is found.
Here’s a brief rundown of the current debacles facing Obama:
1) IRS as a Political Weapon
The IRS singled out and harassed conservative political groups, including during the election year of 2012. The mere mention of the IRS understandably sends a jolt of anxiety through most Americans, so the implications of this conduct for Tea Party and other conservative groups are obvious. This was the worst kind of dirty politics, and an affront to even the most basic trust in government.
While the IRS admitted this egregious conduct, already there have been lies peddled about the depth and scope of this malfeasance. At first we were told that the breaches were limited to low-level civil servants in a few field offices. But that was also false, as we now know Washington DC-based IRS officials were involved too.
The familiar script from Obama and his phalanx of public relations protectors in the White House—that the IRS abuses are not political, and only those who want answers have any political motivations—sounds increasingly obtuse, and pathetic. All the obfuscation on these issues come from the same direction, and benefit the same side of the political aisle.
And ultimately, incompetence and ignorance are poor excuses for a chief executive. The president can only claim he didn’t know what his agencies were up to so many times before someone asks the President that all important question– what would you say, you do here?
2) Frontal Assault on the First Amendment
If a free press is the foundation upon which representative government is built, the Obama administration has allowed the Department of Justice to take a sledgehammer to it. The wholesale investigation of a major news outlet like the Associated Press undermines the intent and spirit of laws meant to promote the discourse necessary for democracy.
And this sets a very dangerous precedent. Unknown to much of the public, there is no special exception for the media to publish classified government information, nor are there hard-and-fast statutory constraints on calling members of the press to divulge their sources under pressure of subpoena. If Obama’s DOJ can do this once, there is no reason they can’t make it standard operating procedure. That would mean bye-bye, fourth estate.
Until now, the federal government has been generally aware of the tension that exists between national security and the First Amendment. Not this administration. Leakers, at least the ones not authorized from the White House itself, are punished severely.
At this early stage, it seems likely the Obama administration recognized that, despite its loud proclamations of outrage, no arrests have been made over the string of national security leaks over the past two years. In order to make it look like they take all leaks seriously, and to send a message to any prospective whistleblowers, Obama officials probably decided to go all in after one unauthorized leaker without the benefit of White House connections. That frenzied effort may have led to the unprecedented, secret seizure of Associated Press records.
3) Benghazi Lies Laid Bare
While the audacity of hyper-partisanship from Obama is jarring, it’s not shocking. So much about this administration, and for so long, has been venal, petty, and undignified. The most recent iteration of the Benghazi hearings solidified those feelings and left even the most ardent administration supporter defending the indefensible. But many questions remain:
Who made up the story about the YouTube video? Was Hillary Clinton incapable of calling her own employees to find out what happened? Where was President Obama during the 8-hour attack? What is being done to bring the attackers to justice? These are just some of the unknowns that require continued investigation despite the administration’s efforts at stonewalling.
It’s impossible to tell at this point what the consequences of these scandals will be for the Obama administration. To be sure, more information on the IRS targeting, DOJ snooping on journalists, and Benghazi is certain to come out. And while it will be damning overall, we can’t yet tell whether the sum total will be an ironclad implication of President Obama or his cabinet.
But if this administration can get away with using federal agencies to stifle political dissent, harassing and spying on journalists, and lying about the origins, actions, and aftermath of a terrorist attack, America is no longer worthy of the Constitution left to us by the Founders.
It’s time for answers and accountability. The dignity and future of the Republic hangs in the balance.
An Interview With Barack Obama About The IRS Scandal, AP Phone Records And Benghazi (philosophers-stone.co.uk)
Survival Mode: 3 Huge Scandals Could Bring Down Obama Admin (1800politics.com)
Graham to Obama: IRS targeted BGEA and Samaritan’s Purse, too (newsobserver.com)
Graham to Obama: IRS targeted BGEA and Samaritan’s Purse, too (charlotteobserver.com)
This photo was taken on September 11, 2012.
Sept. 11, 2012
“Denis McDonough, Deputy National Security Advisor, left, updates the President and Vice President on the situation in the Middle East and North Africa. National Security Advisor Tom Donilon and Chief of Staff Jack Lew are at right.” (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
This official White House photograph is being made available only for publication by news organizations and/or for personal use printing by the subject(s) of the photograph. The photograph may not be manipulated in any way and may not be used in commercial or political materials, advertisements, emails, products, promotions that in any way suggests approval or endorsement of the President, the First Family, or the White House.
Benghazi Bag Man, Denis McDonough, to be named Obama’s Next Chief of Staff (atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com)
Photos: Behind The Scenes With Obama Plus Bo (abcnews.go.com)
Now boarding the Obama Administration scandal train: the EPA
The Environmental Protection Agency would like you to know it can abuse its power to punish Barack Obama’s political enemies as well as the next agency, thank you very much. In this case, it’s more a question of first-class seating and concierge service for Obama’s political allies, while those nasty conservatives get stuck in economy class, behind the jet engine, in the middle seat, right next to the screaming baby, while the flight attendants block off the lavatory with a beverage cart that never seems to get any closer to their seats.
From the Washington Examiner:
Conservative groups seeking information from the Environmental Protection Agency have been routinely hindered by fees normally waived for media and watchdog groups, while fees for more than 90 percent of requests from green groups were waived, according to requests reviewed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
CEI reviewed Freedom of Information Act requests sent between January 2012 and this spring from several environmental groups friendly to the EPA’s mission, and several conservative groups, to see how equally the agency applies its fee waiver policy for media and watchdog groups. Government agencies are supposed to waive fees for groups disseminating information for public benefit.
“This is as clear an example of disparate treatment as the IRS’ hurdles selectively imposed upon groups with names ominously reflecting an interest in, say, a less intrusive or biased federal government,” said CEI fellow Chris Horner.
Just how disparate was this treatment?
And Then There Were Five Obama Scandals…? (pjmedia.com)
Uh oh: Obama’s EPA mistreated conservative groups, too? (theblaze.com)
Rush Limbaugh offers to sit down with Obama
‘If it were not for me, the news media would be able to protect him’
Published: 3 hours ago
PALM BEACH, Fla. – In the wake of news reports that President Obama is blaming Rush Limbaugh for the political gridlock in Washington, the radio powerhouse is now offering to sit down with the commander in chief to hold face-to-face discussions.
“In the spirit of doing whatever I can to move things forward in this country,” Limbaugh said Tuesday afternoon, “I would like to make myself available to the president of the United States to sit down and talk with him at a place of his choosing and discuss the problems facing the country, and maybe working together, since I am the opposition, since I am the obstacle, since I am the reason he can’t get things done.”
“I’ll be glad to sit down with him, any time, any place that he wants. Perhaps we can hash this out and come to a … mutual understanding or agreement of how to get things off the dime and to move things forward.”
On Monday, Obama reportedly met with top-name fundraisers including entertainer Justin Timberlake and his wife, actress Jessica Biel, as well as designer Tommy Hilfiger at the Greenwich Village home of producer Harvey Weinstein.
Obama complained about the lack of progress on his agenda, specifically blaming Limbaugh.
“My thinking was when we beat [Republicans] in 2012 that might break the fever, and it’s not quite broken yet,” Obama said, according to the White House pool report. “I genuinely believe there are Republicans out there who would like to work with us but they’re fearful of their base and they’re concerned about what Rush Limbaugh might say about them. And as a consequence we get the kind of gridlock that makes people cynical about government.”
“Let me translate this for you,” Limbaugh responded during his top-rated radio program.
“What the president of the United States is really saying is that Republican senators, Republican members of the House of Representatives do not vote the way he wants them to because they’re afraid that I will tell the truth about them. If it were not for me, the news media would be able to protect him.
“In fact, what the president is saying is that these elected Republicans actually do want to help him. They do want to vote with him. They do want to join him in his agenda. But they can’t, since I will actually report what they’re doing, they have to worry that their constituents will hear the truth from me and get mad at them. If I weren’t around, they could for vote for Obama and vote with Obama and the media would cover for them and there would not be any media criticism of them. This is what the president is saying. The president is telling his donors that there are plenty of Republicans that can’t wait to help him move his agenda forward if not for their fear of me.”
Limbaugh also noted, “This is the third olive branch that I have offered in this spirit of cooperation, assistance, and help.”
“You remember, ladies and gentlemen, I even extended an invitation to play golf with President Obama. The invitation was extended via Zev Chafets, the author of the book “An Army of One,” that book about me. Zev Chafets extended the invitation to Obama via David Axelrod. He called Axelrod, and he said, ‘Rush would love to play golf with President Obama and hash things out.’ Axelrod said to Zev Chafets, ‘No. He can go play with himself.’”
Rush to the President: Let’s Talk It Out (rushlimbaugh.com)
Obama says GOP too ‘concerned’ with Rush Limbaugh (theblaze.com)
Obama Blames Rush Limbaugh for His Disintegrating Presidency (moonbattery.com)
Obama to Hollywood Donors: We Haven’t Quite Broken the Republican Party Yet (thegatewaypundit.com)
Obama: Rush Limbaugh Kept Republicans Fighting in Second Term (breitbart.com)
(MY TWO SENSE: It has been some time since I’ve been unable to call, by name, this oval office emperor. I have been unable to capitalize any of his name(s) or labels or hear his voice without becoming nauseated and enraged. His tyrannical rule has cost Americans, thus far, myriad liberties, privacy, and the willingness or ability to trust any politician again. The incredibly long list of those who serve under this tyrant are as soulless as he. So, we are a nation in big trouble, with very few public servants left who just might have a modicum of honor. We cannot be certain of them, however, until personal integrity, of each, displays as a matter of rote. Evidence of honor, integrity, values, and morals is missing in government at all levels, local and federal. My God—how did we get here?
Washington DC politics, a cesspool of debauchery, is in big trouble, now that one cover-up after another has been exposed. Regardless of those who continue to hide their heads up that you-know-what, road–in spite of their number, truth is truth, and we must continue to demand the complete story—all of the facts. We must refuse to allow any of these criminals to further shred the US Constitution lose momentum. Let us keep feet to the fire because, if we don’t, and given the opportunity, this crew of thugs will delay, delay, delay until judicial actions become lost in the dictator’s fog. He will threaten lives, careers, and family with everything in his power from death to prison to keep the facts from coming out. He will postpone coöperation until the country forgets, or is distracted by another story. If we allow this, culpability and punishment won’t come to the guilty, and they will walk free to get back to the work of “fundamentally transformating America.
‘Taking Revisionist History Too Far’: Washington Post Fact-Checker Gives Obama ‘Four Pinocchios’ on Benghazi Claim
May. 14, 2013 9:35am
Eight months after the terrorist attack that killed four Americans in Benghazi, the debate on whether President Barack Obama immediately identified the incident as a terrorist attack continues.
“The day after it happened, I acknowledged that this was an act of terrorism,” Obama said at a press conference on Monday. Though Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler has written several times before about what exactly Obama actually said that day and what he meant, Kessler is once again examining the issue. This time, he’s turning up the heat.
“The president’s claim that he said ‘act of terrorism’ is taking revisionist history too far,” Kessler wrote in a post Tuesday, “given that [Obama] repeatedly refused to commit to that phrase when asked directly by reporters in the weeks after the attack.”
Kessler noted (once again) that though Obama did actually use the phrase “act of terror” after the attack, it was done “in vague terms, usually wrapped in a patriotic fervor.” In essence, it wasn’t clear that Obama was specifically referring to the Benghazi attack as a terrorist attack when he said “act of terror.” Most importantly, Obama didn’t say “terrorism” at all the day after the attack. He said “act of terror” and in subsequent remarks, declined to address the incident as a terrorist attack.
Indeed, in an interview with CBS immediately after the Benghazi attack, Obama was asked if he believed it was “a terrorist attack.” Obama responded, “It’s too early to know how this came about, what group was involved. But obviously it was an attack on Americans.” He continued, “I don’t want to jump the gun on this.”
Splitting hairs? Kessler preemptively defended himself from that charge in a previous post:
The Fact Checker spent nine years as diplomatic correspondent for The Washington Post, and such nuances of phrasing are often very important. A president does not simply utter virtually the same phrase three times in two days about a major international incident without careful thought about the implications of each word.
In previous posts on the topic, Kessler has not issued any “Pinocchios” for Obama’s claim that he immediately labeled the Benghazi incident as a terrorist attack. In the latest post, however, Kessler gives Obama four. According to the rating scale, four Pinocchios is reserved for claims believed to be “whoppers.”
Caitlin Hayden, spokeswoman for the White House national security council, previously defended the administration from Kessler’s assessment on the issue, noting that former President George W. Bush used the phrase “act of terror” while visiting victims hospitalized by the 9/11 terrorist attack.
WASHPOST: Obama’s claim he called ‘act of terrorism’ — Four Pinocchios… (washingtonpost.com)
Obama Calls Criticism on Benghazi Talking Points a ‘Sideshow’ (foxnewsinsider.com)