You can be sure Holder would not allow an ordinary citizen to delay as he has
This week, America held its collective breath as it waited on the grand jury indictment verdict for Officer Darren Wilson. Wilson, you’ll recall, had the misfortune to run into 6’5″, 289-lb. Michael Brown, an 18-year-old black man who had just finished strong-arm robbing a convenience store.
Wilson pulled over Brown as he and his accomplice walked in the middle of the street; all available evidence shows that Brown then pushed himself through the driver’s side window, punched Wilson, went for his gun, was shot in the hand, ran, turned around, charged Wilson, and was shot to death.
But that doesn’t matter. And it has never mattered. Because facts do not matter to those attempting to rectify what they perceive as an unjust universe. For those utopian visionaries – and, yes, violent thugs who rob stores are minions of the utopian visionaries — individuals do not exist. Individuals are merely stand-ins for groups.
Wilson was a white cop; therefore, he was the Racist White Establishment. Brown was a black teenager; therefore, he was the Innocent Black Victim. The parts have already been written; Wilson was merely unlucky enough to land the starring role.
And so we expect riots no matter what the outcome of the indictment. Should Wilson escape indictment due to complete lack of evidence, the utopians and their rioting henchmen will attribute that acquittal to the Racist White Establishment. Should he be indicted, the utopians and their rioting henchmen will cite Wilson as merely the latest example of the Racist White Establishment. No matter the antecedent, the consequence has been determined in advance: rage, riots, recriminations.
If all of this sounds familiar, that’s because it is.
Read the rest here
We Told You So.
Politics Versus Education
Attorney General Eric Holder’s attempt to suppress the spread of charter schools in Louisiana was just one of the signs of that cynicism. His nationwide threats of legal action against schools that discipline more black students than he thinks they should are at least as damaging.
Charter schools are hated by teachers’ unions and by much of the educational establishment in general. They seem to be especially hated when they succeed in educating minority children whom the educational establishment says cannot be educated.
Apparently it can be done when you don’t have to hire unionized teachers with iron-clad tenure, and when you don’t have to follow the dogmas in vogue in the educational establishment.
Last year, there was an attempt to shut down the American Indian Model Schools in Oakland, California — schools that had been ranked among the top schools in the nation, schools with the top test scores in their district and the fourth highest scores in the entire state of California.
The reason given was that the former — repeat, FORMER — head of these schools was accused of financial irregularities. Since there are courts of law to determine the guilt or innocence of individuals, why should school children be punished by having their schools shut down, immediately and permanently, before any court even held a trial?
Fortunately, a court order prevented this planned vindictive closing of this highly successful charter school with minority students. But the attempt shows the animus and the cynical disregard of the education of children who have few other places to get a comparable education.
Attorney General Holder’s threats of legal action against schools where minority students are disciplined more often than he wants are a much more sweeping and damaging blow to the education of poor and minority students across the country.
Among the biggest obstacles to educating children in many ghetto schools are disruptive students whose antics, threats and violence can make education virtually impossible. If only 10 percent of the students are this way, that sacrifices the education of the other 90 percent.
The idea that Eric Holder, or anybody else, can sit in Washington and determine how many disciplinary actions against individual students are warranted or unwarranted in schools across the length and breadth of this country would be laughable if it were not so tragic.
Relying on racial statistics tells you nothing, unless you believe that black male students cannot possibly be more disruptive than Asian female students, or that students in crime-ridden neighborhoods cannot possibly require disciplinary actions more often than children in the most staid, middle-class neighborhoods.
Attorney General Holder is not fool enough to believe either of those things. Why then is he pursuing this numbers game?
The most obvious answer is politics. Anything that promotes a sense of grievance from charges of racial discrimination offers hope of energizing the black vote to turn out to vote for Democrats, which is especially needed when support from other voters is weakening in the wake of Obama administration scandals and fiascoes.
Eric Holder’s other big racial crusade, against requiring identification for voting, is the same political game. And it is carried out with the same cynical promotion of fears, with orchestrated hysteria from other Democrats — as if having to show identification to vote is like a revival of the Ku Klux Klan.
Blacks, whites and everybody else can be asked for identification these days, whether cashing a check or using a credit card at a local store or going to an airport — or even getting into some political meetings called to protest voter ID laws.
But to sacrifice the education of children, especially children for whom education may be their only ticket out of poverty, is truly a new low. As someone once said to Senator Joe McCarthy, “Have you no sense of decency, sir?”
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is http://www.tsowell.com. To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at http://www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2014 CREATORS.COM
The Obama administration has not, and apparently will not, coöperate with members of congress in getting to the bottom of the cesspool commonly known as Fast and Furious. Additionally, members of congress seem content with letting the Benghazi investigation lie fallow, instead of harvesting the facts to punish those complicit in the murder of Americans in the pigsty formerly known as Libya.
Townhall magazine has published current information on more of the results of what Fast and Furious weapons have managed to mangle or murder.
“A month ago, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder asking why the Department of Justice was covering up deaths and weapons linked to Operation Fast and Furious. The inquiry came shortly after a Mexican police chief and his body-guard were killed by cartel members using Fast and Furious guns. “Since the beginning of this investigation, we have followed the link between Fast and Furious weapons and crimes committed on both sides of the border. On numerous occasions we have asked the Department to keep us apprised of Fast and Furious weapon recoveries — especially as they relate to violent crimes,” Grassley wrote. “Despite our repeated requests, it has been over a year since we last heard from the Department on this issue. The Department his from Congress this recent internal trace record showing a link between the murder of a police chief and Fast and Furious. Such actions do little to promote trust between the Department and Congress, and only provide further evidence that the Department is actively trying to conceal all information pertaining to Fast and Furious from Congress.”
To see the remainder of this story click here.
There’s more to the story than we have been told. But, didn’t we have to know there is/was given the race-baiting players such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, many members of the Congressional Black Caucus, the New Black Panthers, Potus, AG Eric Holder and a cast of many thousands across the breadth of this country. Of course we had to know, because the stench of the hidden aspects of this American tragedy were, as usual, covered-up by the mainscream media and the DOJ..
We now know more because other media consisting of online sources such as blogs and similar sources have revealed many facts heretofore purposely shielded from the ordinary citizen’s view. Most of the American media should hang their printing presses over an acid bath since the media will not use them for truth … might as well dissolve them.
Pajamas TV (PJTV) just one of the many concerns called the new media did not let the lies and omissions go untold. Bill Whittle has put it altogether and you can access his story at the link just below:
Here are some narrative excerpts from the video:
Trayvon did not buy iced tea. He bought Arizona Watermelon fruit juice cocktail. That is 100% clear from the Crime Scene Photographs released to the press and published by the Orlando Sentinel. Use the link I’ve just provided, scroll to photograph #50, and see for yourself.
Why would this make a difference? What possible reason would there be to care about whether Trayvon Martin’s soft drink flavor was iced tea or watermelon?
First, what, specifically, is “lean”? According these exerpts from urbandictionary.com:
Purple Drank is a intoxicating beverage also known by the names lean, sizzurp, and liquid codeine. It is commonly abused by southern rappers and wannabe suburban teenagers. It is a mixture of Promethazine/Codeine cough syrup and sprite, with a few jolly ranchers and/or skittles thrown in.
Next, go to the cannibis.com site I’ve linked above. If you can get through the heavy dose of profanity used by its fans, you will find that watermelon flavored soft drinks have become a popular alternative to Sprite when making “lean.”
Judicial Watch is worthy of your attention and support. In the copied article below, you will learn of the sleazy ways your government twists facts and helps those that would “fundamentally change America.”
You can probably spend a day watching and listening to the videos and other records concocted by our giant government agencies. All of the below stuff is good entertainment, but terrible government. We hope you will pay particular attention to this bolded account which is located fairly deep in this post:
Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch Detail Role of Justice Department in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests
Skip ahead to the above bolded article, but don’t forget to come back to the beginning.
Videos Obtained by Judicial Watch Reveal Costumed Parodies, Playacting at GSA
From the latest edition of “federal officials gone wild”…
Judicial Watch recently obtained more than a half-dozen newly uncovered videos from the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) which show senior GSA officials and staff participating in costumed playacting and parodies – on the taxpayers’ dime of course.If you would like to receive weekly emails updating you about all of our efforts to fight corruption, please sign up here.
* State:Judicial Watch Weekly Update
Owing to the absolutely ridiculous nature of these videos, our discovery made major headlines nationwide, including Politico, The Huffington Post and The Daily Mail. The Associated Press, which broke our big story, is syndicated in hundreds of newspapers nationwide, and many other media outlets.
These videos provide clear (and bizarre) evidence of GSA’s extravagance, which, along with a scandalous 2010 Las Vegas regional conference, were revealed in a scathing April 2012 inspector general (IG) report. At one time, you could actually access these videos on the GSA’s own website. Then came the release of the IG Report excoriating GSA’s Vegas party spending, and the videos suddenly disappeared. Until now.
JW obtained the videos in response to a June 15, 2012, FOIA request seeking videos produced by the GSA’s Northeast Region (known as Region 2) from 2011 through June 2012. Because the agency failed to timely respond to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit on May 23, 2013.
And I think when you view the videos for yourself, you’ll see why the Obama administration attempted to shield them from public disclosure. They show a wide variety of costly and embarrassing videotaped performances by senior GSA officials and employees, including:
- The Rocky Jog – With the Rocky movie theme blaring in the background, senior GSA officials lead employees on an extended jog through the corridors of the GSA’s New York office and the streets of Manhattan.
The jog is initiated by Ben Kochanski, Deputy Regional Commissioner, GSA Public Buildings Service, whose 2012 salary was $141,066.
Kochanski is then joined by Joanna Rosato, Regional Commissioner of GSA Public Buildings Service, whose 2012 salary was $164,500. Many additional GSA employees then join these two senior officials.
- Directors Meeting – GSA employee tries conducting a seminar for a room full of screeching GSA employees/monkeys who continue drinking and partying until he joins them in a dance routine.
- Rap Music Video – GSA official transforms into a rap singer to explain to young employees the need for additional revenue.
- Jeopardy – GSA officials and employees participate in an elaborate Jeopardy game show parody, complete with theme music, light-up board, and canned audience applause.
- The “Leasefather” – GSA employees parody the baker scene from “The Godfather” movie with supplicant pleading for Don Tony (stroking stuffed cat) to give him justice.
- Mission Impossible – Former GSA official Ashley Cohen portrays Jim Phelps in a “Mission Impossible” TV show parody with blaring theme, lit matches, and an exploding tape recorder.
- Sherlock Holmes – After an opening with stock footage from Universal Studios, GSA employees costumed as Holmes and Watson conduct a lengthy discussion.
Now I ask you. What do these videos have to do with the proper and efficient functioning of the GSA? Absolutely nothing, of course. Which is why our client, GSA whistleblower Linda Shenwick brought these videos to our attention. Ms. Shenwick objected to frivolous expenditures in the GSA’s Region 2 (which covers the entire Northeast and the Caribbean), the office which produced the videos and earned the ire of her GSA leadership in the process.
Rather than discouraging this juvenile behavior, GSA had a policy of encouraging and rewarding employees who produced and performed in the controversial videos.
And what happened to Ms. Shenwick, who was merely attempting to prevent fraud inside the agency for which she worked? She has since been demoted and isolated, shifted from the agency’s senior executive suite to an office in the agency’s child care center. (Judicial Watch is helping Ms. Shenwick to pursue a whistleblower case against the GSA with the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board.)
All of this from an agency that touts itself as an “innovation engine” to help the government cut costs!
With respect to the nearly $1 million Las Vegas extravaganza, the event featured not only costly videos similar to those just uncovered by JW, but also luxury accommodations for employees and their loved ones, fine cuisine, parties and expensive gifts. Dozens of agency workers were also awarded cash bonuses for arranging the event, which the Region 9 Commissioner/Acting Regional Administrator had ordered to be “over the top.”
Mission accomplished there.
Disclosure of the Las Vegas event and other abuses led to the removal of some GSA officials, but the agency officials who produced these videos still have their jobs. President Obama is seeking at least $250 million dollars for the GSA in his most recent budget.
Unfortunately, this is not the only example of shameless waste in the form of ridiculous videos and other questionable expenses inside the Obama administration.
As I reported to you a few weeks back, the IRS bankrolled a Star Trek parody video at a cost of $50,187! The agency also produced a video of IRS division managers dancing on stage and spent $44,500 for two speakers, one of whom was paid to create paintings on stage of Michael Jordan and Albert Einstein.
These funds were expended during a 2010 IRS conference that cost American taxpayers $4.1 million overall.
The activities of the GSA and the IRS are further examples of a bloated federal government completely out of control. Clearly the new GSA administrator will have his work cut out for him if this pattern of preposterous waste is to be curtailed.
Our client Linda Shenwick has done her best to alert GSA to these abuses but her efforts were ignored by GSA leadership. Federal employees such as Ms. Shenwick, who alert senior officials to this type of wasteful nonsense, are punished and vilified. As these newly uncovered videos demonstrate, there clearly needs to be a more thorough housecleaning at GSA. In fact, every agency in this administration is due for a good scrubbing.
Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch Detail Role of Justice Department in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests
If you want to get a sense of the Obama/Holder Department of Justice’s (DOJ) policies on race, just take a look at the agency’s response to two high profile events.
Let’s start with the thugs from the New Black Panther Party for Self Defense who brandished weapons and threatened prospective voters at a Philadelphia polling station in 2008. The Bush DOJ quickly filed criminal charges against the activists in a very public voter intimidation case. Then Barack Obama got elected, installed Eric Holder, and the DOJ dropped much of the case over the objections of its own attorneys.
Judicial Watch (along with key disclosures by whistleblowers and former DOJ attorneys Christopher Coates and J. Christian Adams) was able to help prove that the racist application of voting rights laws by Obama political appointees inside DOJ was the root cause of this terrible decision. We also proved that at least one DOJ official lied under oath about who was involved in the decision. (Read more here.)
Now contrast this response with that of the DOJ to last year’s shooting death of a young black man named Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman (a Hispanic) in Florida. (Zimmerman was charged in the shooting and is now standing trial.)
According to documents unearthed by JW, following the Martin shooting, the Holder DOJ dispatched a little-known unit within the agency called the Community Relations Service (CRS), to Sanford, FL, to help organize and manage rallies and protests against George Zimmerman.
Now here’s how we got the records. We first filed a FOIA request with the DOJ on April 24, 2012, and received 125 pages on May 30, 2012. We then administratively appealed the request on June 5, 2012, and received 222 pages more on March 6, 2013. (This investigation resulted in requests for information being filed by Judicial Watch with 13 different government agencies!)
Included in those documents that weren’t withheld from us (and plenty were) are vouchers for expenses associated with the community organizing activity of DOJ employees. Highlights include:
- March 25 – 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being “deployed to Sanford, FL, to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”
- March 25 – 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 “in Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.
- March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent $892.55 in Sanford, FL “to provide support for protest deployment in Florida.”
- March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent an additional $751.60 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.”
- April 3 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $1,307.40 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford.”
- April 11 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $552.35 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male.”
But there’s more.
From a Florida Sunshine Law request filed on April 23, 2012, JW received thousands of pages of emails on April 27, 2012, in which was found an email by Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board Program Officer Amy Carswell from April 16, 2012 , discussing a news article in the Orlando Sentinel about the secretive peacekeepers: “Congratulations to our partners, Thomas Battles, Regional Director, and Mildred De Robles, Miami-Dade Coordinator and their co-workers at the U.S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service for their outstanding and ongoing efforts to reduce tensions and build bridges of understanding and respect in Sanford, Florida.”
In reply to that message, Battles said: “Thank you Partner. You did lots of stuff behind the scene to make Miami a success. We will continue to work together.” He signed the email simply Tommy.
Carswell responded: “That’s why we make the big bucks.”
But is this really what the DOJ’s participation was all about in this case – “reducing tensions and building bridges?” Not by a long shot.
Set up under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the DOJ’s CRS, the employees of which are required by law to “conduct their activities in confidence,” reportedly has greatly expanded its role under President Barack Obama.
Though the agency claims to use “impartial mediation practices and conflict resolution procedures,” press reports along with the documents obtained by Judicial Watch suggest that the unit deployed to Sanford, FL, took an active role in working with those demanding the prosecution of Zimmerman.
On April 15, 2012, during the height of the protests, the Orlando Sentinel reported, “They [the CRS] helped set up a meeting between the local NAACP and elected officials that led to the temporary resignation of police Chief Bill Lee according to Turner Clayton, Seminole County chapter president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.”
The paper quoted the Rev. Valarie Houston, pastor of Allen Chapel AME Church, a focal point for protestors, as saying “They were there for us,” after a March 20 meeting with CRS agents.
Separately, in response to a Florida Sunshine Law request to the City of Sanford, Judicial Watch also obtained an audio recording of a “community meeting” held at Second Shiloh Missionary Baptist Church in Sanford on April 19, 2012.
The meeting, which led to the ouster of Sanford’s Police Chief Bill Lee, was scheduled after a group of college students calling themselves the “Dream Defenders” barricaded the entrance to the police department demanding Lee be fired. Leading the meeting is none other CRS federal employee Thomas Battles. Battles says during the meeting, that “if a community perceives that there’s something wrong in the black community, there’s something wrong.” That sounds like something racial agitator – and United States Attorney General Eric Holder crony – Al Sharpton might say!
According to the Orlando Sentinel, DOJ employees with the CRS had arranged a 40-mile police escort for the students from Daytona Beach to Sanford.
These documents detail the extraordinary intervention by the Justice Department in the pressure campaign leading to the prosecution of George Zimmerman. My guess is that most Americans would rightly object to taxpayers paying government employees to help organize racially-charged demonstrations.
So don’t believe the hype from the DOJ that the agency’s intervention on behalf of Trayvon Martin was about peace-keeping. This was about Alinsky-style organizing and racial politics pure and simple, something the Holder Justice Department practices on a daily bases.
Judicial Watch Sues State Department for Clinton Documents about Possible Conflicts of Interest
The moment Barack Obama tapped Hillary Clinton to serve as Secretary of State, the alarm bells starting ringing. Not only because of the Clintons’ long history of corruption (see Chinagate, Filegate, Travelgate and the long list of women abused and smeared by both Clintons, for just a few examples), but also because of the Clintons’ propensity to peddle influence to the highest bidder without regard for the harmful impact on the United States of America and its people.
How on earth could Hillary Clinton serve as the nation’s top diplomat with her husband traipsing around the globe collecting six figures on speeches and donations from foreign governments for his Clinton Global Initiative? What kind of wheeling and dealing took place behind closed doors that might compromise or influence U.S diplomatic policy? The possibilities for high stakes shenanigans were endless.
And so, Judicial Watch began asking questions. And those questions were ignored (again) by the Obama administration in defiance of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). So we are now once again forced to go through the courts to seek redress.
On May 28, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of State to obtain documents pertaining to possible conflicts of interest between the actions taken by Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and Bill Clinton’s activities (including his Clinton Global Initiative).
The Judicial Watch lawsuit was filed after two years of the State Department refusing to comply with a May 2011 FOIA request for responsive documents. By law, “all federal agencies are required to respond to a FOIA request within 20 business days.”
Pursuant to a Judicial Watch FOIA request filed with Department of Justice (DOJ) on May 2, 2011, in addition to standard forms from the Office of Personnel Management pertaining to Clinton’s position as Secretary of State, we seek the following records:
- Any and all certificates of divestiture for Mrs. Clinton;
- Any and all individual waivers issued to or for Mrs. Clinton pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 208 (b)(1) and 5 C.F.R. §2640.301 or any other applicable ethics statues, regulations, guidelines or agreements;
- Any and all communications and records of communications – including but not limited to phone logs – related to Mr. Clinton’s speech schedule; and,
- Any and all communications and records of communications – including but not limited to e-mails, fax reports, and phone logs – related to former Mr. Clinton’s personal or charitable financial relationships with foreign leaders and governments.
As I say, information from the Obama administration has not been forthcoming.
The State Department acknowledged receiving the Judicial Watch FOIA request on May 17, 2011, and was required by law to respond by June 8, 2011, at the latest. As of the date of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, the State Department had failed to produce any records responsive to the request, indicate when any responsive records will be produced, or demonstrate that responsive records are exempt from production.
The potential for conflicts of interest between Hillary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State and Bill Clinton’s international ventures grew increasingly controversial in late 2008 when the former president released a list of 200,000+ donors to his library and foundation in what he termed “a deal between” Obama “and Hillary.”
This “deal” reportedly included nine conditions to which Bill Clinton acquiesced, says the New York Times, including a ban on foreign government contributions to the Clinton Global Initiative. And here’s why those donations are so sensitive.
According to an AP wire story, “Saudi Arabia gave $10 million – $25 million to the foundation. Other government donors include Norway, Kuwait, Qatar, Brunei, Oman …” CNN at the time warned that Clinton’s “complicated global business interests could present future conflicts of interest that result in unneeded headaches for the incoming commander-in-chief.”
Yes, the web of connections between the Clintons and foreign interests is complex, to say the least. But the potential impact of these complexities goes far beyond any migraines suffered by Barack Obama. This is about the potential for undermining our national interest in exchange for contributions to the Clintons’ coffers.
After all, the Clintons sold out our national security to the Communist Chinese in exchange for contributions to Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign. So why not solicit the Saudi Arabians for contributions to Clinton’s non-profit empire, for example? Again, in politics, and especially with the Clintons, even the appearance of impropriety can be impropriety itself.
Also among the “conditions” of the Clinton-Obama deal was a stipulation requiring Bill Clinton’s activities to be subjected to review by State Department ethics officials.
Does this make you feel more comfortable? Especially considering the fact that one of the individuals responsible for vetting Mrs. Clinton for the job of Secretary of State in the first place was none other than Bill Clinton’s former deputy White House counsel Cheryl Mills.
Mills is a longtime Clinton family confidante, who “endeared herself to the Clintons with her never-back-down, share-nothing, don’t-give-an-inch approach …” wrote the Washington Post in 1999.
As I noted in a recent column on Mills, she has been a “Clinton cover-up expert, specializing in subverting investigations of Bill and Hillary Clinton. Whether in the Bill Clinton White House or the Hillary Clinton State Department, Mills has served as something of a “double agent” — working on the taxpayers’ tab while seeming to spend all her time defending the personal fortunes of the Clintons.” (Read more about her activities here.)
Most recently, evidence emerged that Mills attempted to silence the congressional testimony of State Department whistleblower Gregory Hicks in the Benghazi-gate scandal.
Not surprisingly, after clearing Mrs. Clinton for the DOS job, Mills was named the incoming Secretary’s Chief of Staff. Incidentally, Ms. Mills was also a featured speaker at Bill Clinton’s 2012 Clinton Global Initiative annual meeting.
So the job of “ethically vetting” Mrs. Clinton was left to a former Clinton hack, who was subsequently offered a job from the person whom she was “investigating.” And she also served as a keynote speaker for the very organization at the center of the controversy over the Clintons’ conflicts of interest. Hardly reassuring.
And this is precisely why we went to court to secure the records necessary for the American people to judge for themselves whether or not Bill and Hillary Clinton acted ethically during the former First Lady’s tenure at the State Department. We’re certainly not willing to leave the matter to the likes of Cheryl Mills.
If you’d like to help us in this investigation, or the many others we have ongoing, please consider a tax-deductible contribution by clicking here. Every bit helps!
Until next week…
As she testified regarding Benghazi and hurled the now famous question/statement:
“With all due respect, the fact is, we had four dead Americans! Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided they’d go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? …”
Her concern was not for the dead patriots whom gave their all for this country after they had the rug pulled from under them. No, her concern was self-concern as she surely thought her coming run for president would be greatly diminished if the truth should be forthcoming.
If she shed tears for the lost heroes it was not apparent; nor was it mentioned in the mainscream media. According to some reports she apologized for the state department’s sorry system of dealing with life-threatening episode; however, apologies do not comport with actually taking responsibility for one’s short-comings or lack of effective action.
Yesterday,she found herself following in Eric Holder‘s sorry footsteps. As did Holder, she stood before the Delta Sigma Theta Soroity (touted as the largest black women’s organization in the world) and expressed her real or unreal sentiments concerning the death of Trayvon Martin and the jury’s verdict of not guilty in the trial of George Zimmerman. See the beginning of the Breitbart article just below and then following the link to the rest of the post.
Hillary Addresses Zimmerman Verdict ‘Heartache’
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton reacted to the acquittal of George Zimmerman for shooting Trayvon Martin in self-defense while speaking Tuesday evening to Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, the largest African-American women’s organization in the country.
“My prayers are with the Martin family and with every family who loves someone who is lost to violence,” Clinton said. “No mother, no father, should ever have to fear for their child walking down a street in the United States of America.”
She added that the not guilty verdict for Zimmerman “brought heartache, deep painful heartache” to families.
Follow the link and check the Related Articles for more:
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
In a recent oped at Fox News, Daniel Blomberg and Eric Rassbach argued that IRS has a long history of targeting that has focused mainly on houses of worship. It uses ‘the crushing power to deny or revoke the non-profit status of a synagogue, church, or mosque if it says something the IRS decides is too “political.”‘
There are two ways the targeting works. One way is for an outside group, often one that is anti-religion, to file a complaint asking the IRS to investigate a church they don’t like. The IRS responds to the complaint by opening an investigation and asking the church often hundreds of questions about its activities, with the threat of revocation of non-profit status. This is what lawyers call “selective enforcement” and it is unconstitutional. No one should be singled out in this way, especially because of collusion between the IRS and outside groups with an ax to grind.
The second way the censorship starts is for IRS officials to take their lead from high government officials, including the President, to decide which groups to target for disfavor.
This is apparently what happened to the “tea party” groups, but religious groups have also been targeted in this way.
Don’t believe it? Just ask Billy Graham. Last fall, the famed Christian evangelist publicly advocated on behalf of a ballot measure in his home state of North Carolina, taking a position that the President and other high government officials publicly opposed. The tax man was knocking at the door almost immediately. And while the expensive, time-consuming audit eventually ended without any finding of wrongdoing by Graham, a message was sent to every other religious group that might oppose government policy: the IRS can use its audit powers to harass you or shut you down simply for saying what you believe. That kind of intimidation is wrong–and unconstitutional.
While some Christian churches and organizations were targeted by the Obama administration for audits because of their alleged political activities, others were actually encouraged to to engage in political speech in church. Encouraged by members of the Obama administration.
Last June, during the Obama campaign’s election year push to mobilize black churches in support of his reelection, Michelle Obama, herself made an appeal to black churchgoers to get informed about politics. At a religious conference in Nashville, she said that there is no better place than church to talk about political issues.
“To anyone who says that church is no place to talk about these issues, you tell them there is no place better – no place better,” Obama told the African Methodist Episcopal Church’s 49th general conference, held in in Nashville, Tenn.
“Because ultimately, these are not just political issues – they are moral issues,” she said. “They’re issues that have to do with human dignity and human potential, and the future we want for our kids and our grandkids.”
“We will have representatives from nine denominations who actually pastor somewhere in the neighborhood of about 10 million people,” he said, “and we’re going to first of all equip them with the information they need to know about what they can say and what they cannot say in the church that would violate their 501c3 status with the IRS.” [Emphasis added]
While they won’t specifically tell people whom to vote for, the respected speakers will discuss “draconian” (hint) voter identification laws, and the Congressional Black Caucus expects the move will only help the Obama’s campaign.
That same month Holder gave a speech before the Council of Black Churches reminding the audience of its history fighting for equal voting right for minorities.
The attorney general told them his office is “aggressively” taking on the task of protecting that right, including challenging several state lawsuits that would overturn key provisions of the Voting Rights Act involving redistricting in Southern states and strict new voter ID laws that strips away the guarantee of equal access to the ballot box in the 2012 election.
Valerie Jarrett traveled to Atlanta, GA to speak at MLK’s Ebenezer Baptist Church in January of 2012.
On the Sunday before the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett visited Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta to give a political speech, in support of her boss (Barack Obama) and congressional Democrats:
“Teachers, and firefighters, and policemen, whose jobs are now in jeopardy because Congress–well let me be specific–because the Republicans in Congress,” Jarrett told the crowd. According to the CBS affiliate in Atlanta, at this point, “Before she could finish her sentence, people in the congregation were laughing, and applauding.”
I think it’s very safe to assume that the Ebenezer Baptist Church was not audited as a result of that politicking.
Fast and Furious, the outrage, and not the movie, started when a renegade Department of Justice (DOJ) headed by Eric The Bolder Holder, decided to make sure that drug cartel members South of the United States would not want for sufficient firepower. The cartels would see gifts of weapons enabling them to kill with impunity, not only their fellow citizens and law enforcement officers, but American citizens, including American law enforcement personnel.
Since Fast and Furious, we have seen other violations by this DOJ come out from their cretinous beginnings via the hard heads of people who should know better, but instead, offer an example of perfect idiocy.We fail to see how, the recent IRS and other tricks of the bumblers trade could have been accomplished without AG Holder’s permission, tacit or otherwise. Our pinning responsibility on Holder does not remove complicity for Obama’s irresponsibility for being ignorant in how to manage a wayward AG. Complicity and inaction allowing Holder one tiny step from being crowned the King of Crime.
The IRS mess, as they say, has legs … the legs of a millipede.Just when it looks as though all the legs have been observed, more are discovered. Check the following story found at the link just below:
- Ted Cruz: Obama Administration Does Not Respect Bill Of Rights (freedomoutpost.com)