Cruz: “Did President Obama Just Launch an Economic Boycott of Israel?” – Updated

images

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, today, called out the Obama Regime for its decision to ban flights to Israel while, at the same time, announcing continuing aid to Gaza that will be funneled to the terrorist organization, Hamas.

Where is the rest of the Republican party on this? Congress holds the purse strings. Why on earth would they allow this travesty to happen?

“Aiding Hamas while simultaneously isolating Israel does two things. One, it helps our enemy. Two, it hurts our ally,” said Sen. Cruz.

He added, “The facts suggest that President Obama has just used a federal regulatory agency to launch an economic boycott on Israel, in order to try to force our ally to comply with his foreign-policy demands.”

Sen. Cruz is asking the Obama Administration to answer five specific questions regarding the FAA’s decision to suspend flights to Israel.

Sen. Cruz’s full statement is below.

“Today, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced that it was extending its ban on flights by U.S. carriers into Israel. The rationale was that because one Hamas-launch rocket had landed in a field one mile from Ben Gurion International Airport, the ‘potentially hazardous security situation created by the armed conflict between Israel and Gaza’ necessitated this extreme action that has so far cancelled some 160 flights and left tens of thousands stranded.

“Obviously, no one wants to place civilian travelers in harm’s way, and the recent downing of Malaysian Airways flight 17 by pro-Russian militants in Ukraine is a stark reminder of the dangers posed by regional unrest. But security concerns in Israel are hardly breaking news, and given the exceptional challenge Israel faces, Ben Gurion has rightly earned the reputation as one of the safest airports in the world due to the aggressive security measures implemented by the Israeli government.

“Given that some 2,000 rockets have been fired into Israel over the last six weeks, many of them at Tel Aviv, it seems curious to choose yesterday at noon to announce a flight ban, especially as the Obama Administration had to be aware of the punitive nature of this action.

“Tourism is an $11 billion industry for Israel, which is in the middle of a summer high season already seriously diminished by the conflict initiated by Hamas. Group tours have been cancelling at a 30% rate. This FAA flight ban may well represent a crippling blow to a key economic sector through both security concerns and worries that additional bans will down more flights and strand more passengers. It hardly matters if or when the ban is lifted. At this point, the damage may already be done.

“Even given the remarkable resilience and prosperity of its economy, Israel has always been vulnerable to economic blackmail. In the 1970s, we saw the Arab League boycott, which tried to punish any financial institution that did business with Israel.

“Today we have similar noxious efforts by the Boycott, Divest, Sanction or ‘BDS’ movement, which seeks to punish Israel for the fact that the militant terrorist elements embraced by the Palestinian Authority make any peace deal an intolerable security risk to Israel at this time. But the Obama Administration has refused to robustly denounce this effort to undermine our ally.

“Instead, Secretary of State John Kerry issued a veiled threat last February when he encouraged boycotts of Israel and said that absent serious Israeli concessions at the negotiating table, Israel’s economic prosperity was ‘not sustainable’ and ‘illusory.’ Secretary Kerry unfortunately reprised this theme just this April, when he threatened that Israel risked becoming an ‘apartheid state’ if Israel did not submit to his chosen solution to the Israel-Palestinian crisis.

BtPfYI1CEAESDWa-550x366Kerry meeting with Netanyahu Wednesday, image via AP

“Taken in the context of Secretary Kerry’s comments, yesterday’s action by the FAA raises some serious questions:

· Was this decision a political decision driven by the White House?

· If the FAA’s decision was based on airline safety, why was Israel singled out, when flights are still permitted into Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen?

· What was the FAA’s ‘safety’ analysis that led to prohibiting flights to Israel, while still permitting flights to Ukraine—where a commercial airline flight was just shot down with a BUK missile?

· What specific communications occurred between the FAA and the White House? And the State Department? Why were any such communications necessary, if this was purely about airline safety?

· Was this a safety issue, or was it using a federal regulatory agency to punish Israel to try to force them to comply with Secretary Kerry’s demand that Israel stop their military effort to take out Hamas’s rocket capacity?

“When Secretary Kerry arrived in Cairo this week his first act was to announce $47 million in additional aid to Gaza, which is in effect $47 million for Hamas. In short order, this travel ban was announced by the FAA. Aiding Hamas while simultaneously isolating Israel does two things. One, it helps our enemy. Two, it hurts our ally.

“Until these serious questions are answered, the facts suggest that President Obama has just used a federal regulatory agency to launch an economic boycott on Israel, in order to try to force our ally to comply with his foreign-policy demands.

“If so, Congress should demand answers.”

The State Department responded to Sen. Cruz’s questions, calling them “ridiculous” and “offensive.”
Hamas, however fully endorses the Obama administration’s decision to suspend U.S. flights to Israel. A spokesman for Hamas said: “The success of Hamas in closing Israeli airspace is a great victory for the resistance, and is the crown of Israel’s failure.”
Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier said, “to suggest the administration’s move does not directly empower Hamas is misguided and short-sighted.” In response to The State Department’s reaction to Cruz’s questions, she added, “we find the Obama Administration’s foreign policy to be ridiculous and offensive. The American people deserve answers to these questions and Sen. Cruz will continue to press for them.”
These days, I’m constantly reminded of the warning signs so many of us saw back in 2008 regarding  candidate Obama and his affinity for the terrorist group Hamas. Would that more Americans had seen it.
UPDATE:
Cruz Vows To Hold All State Department Nominees Until Questions Are Answered About Israeli Flight Ban

WASHINGTON, D.C. –U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, announced that he will hold all State Department nominees until the Obama Administration answers questions about its unprecedented decision to cancel flights to Israel, while at the same time announcing continuing aid that will be funneled to the terrorist organization, Hamas.

Earlier today, Sen. Cruz questioned whether the FAA’s decision to ban all U.S. flights to Israel amounted to an economic boycott of the nation and asked that five questions about the ban be answered.  When asked about his remarks, a State Department spokesperson said the questions were “offensive and ridiculous.”

“Serious questions were asked about the nature of a decision that handed Hamas a public relations victory and will cost Israel billions of dollars,” said Sen. Cruz. “The only thing ‘offensive’ about this situation is how the Obama Administration is spurning our allies to embolden our enemies; the only thing ‘ridiculous’ is the administration’s response to basic questions. Until the State Department answers my questions, I will hold all State Department nominees.”

The five questions Sen. Cruz is asking are below:

  • Was this a political decision driven by the White House? For instance, who was this decision made by – a career official, a political appointee, or someone else (at the FAA, State Department or White House)?
  • If the FAA’s decision was based on airline safety, why was Israel singled out when flights would be permitted into Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen?
  • What was the FAA’s ‘safety’ analysis that led to prohibiting flights to Israel, while still permitting flights to Ukraine—where a commercial airline flight was just shot down with a BUK missile?
  • What specific communications occurred between the FAA and the White House?  And the State Department?  Why were any such communications necessary, if this was purely about airline safety?
  • Was this a safety issue, or was it using a federal regulatory agency to punish Israel to try to force them to comply with Secretary Kerry’s demand that Israel stop their military effort to take out Hamas’s rocket capacity?

UPDATE II:

WaPo: FAA announces that U.S. flights to and from Tel Aviv can resume:

The Federal Aviation Administration announced late Wednesday night that U.S. carriers were allowed to resume flights to and from Tel Aviv.

This came nearly 36 hours after the agency had first banned U.S. airlines from traveling to and from Ben Gurion International Airport, halting service after a rocket landed about a mile away from Israel’s largest airport. The rule change allowing flights to resume went into effect as of 11:45 p.m. on Wednesday.

“Before making this decision, the FAA worked with its U.S. government counterparts to assess the security situation in Israel and carefully reviewed both significant new information and measures the Government of Israel is taking to mitigate potential risks to civil aviation,” the agency said in a statement.

The FAA said that it “will continue to closely monitor the very fluid situation around Ben Gurion Airport.”

No other countries had cancelled flights. Just ours.

Obama was applying his tried and true “the never let a crisis go to waste” method of radical governance – but the Regime was called out, and had to back down.

House Oversight Examining the Justice Department’s Response to the IRS Targeting Scandal (Video)

This morning, the House Oversight and Reform Committee is Examining the Justice Department’s Response to the IRS Targeting Scandal. (Live video at the link.)

The witness is  The Honorable James M. Cole, the Deputy Attorney General. Cole is refusing to answer questions about the investigation, giving the standard answer that he can’t comment on an ongoing investigation.

*Republicans held up Cole’s appointment back in 2010  because he is the lawyer who compared 9/11 to the drug trade.

 Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., incoming chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, accused Cole of wanting to pursue terror suspects as a criminal matter in civilian courts. He cited a 2002 Legal Times column in which Cole called the Sept. 11 attacks “criminal acts of terrorism against a civilian population” — like the Oklahoma City bombing.

Cole went on to write that the United States has faced “many forms of devastating crime,” from the drug trade to organized crime to rape and child abuse. “The acts of Sept. 11 were horrible, but so are these other things,” he wrote.

King said Cole’s appointment indicates the administration wants to continue to implement “dangerous policies” of treating terrorism as a criminal issue. Attorney General Eric Holder, Cole’s new boss, has pushed for criminal trials but has struggled to bring mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed stateside for prosecution.

“I find it absolutely shocking that President Obama would appoint someone who has diminished the 9/11 terrorist attacks by comparing them to the drug trade and who believes that a civilian courtroom is the appropriate venue for 9/11 trials,” King said in a written statement. “I strongly oppose the recess appointment of James Cole to lead the national security team at the Department of Justice.”

Just to give you an idea of how today’s hearing is going, when asked by Chairman Issa if it would be proper to investigate anyone for a year and a half it there was not a smidgen of corruption, Cole answered that sometimes they continue an investigation in order to clear people who have done no wrong.

Here is Rep. Jordan’s opening statement:

Rep. DeSantis Q&A:

 

 Rep. Gowdy Questions Deputy AG Cole about IRS Investigation:

More on James Cole via Discover the Networks:

In September 2002, one year after the 9/11 attacks, Cole condemned the Bush administration’s handling of the war on terror, contending that prosecutions related to that war should be adjudicated in civilian courts rather than military tribunals. Writing in the Legal Times, he stated:

“For all the rhetoric about war, the Sept. 11 attacks were criminal acts of terrorism against a civilian population, much like the terrorist acts of Timothy McVeigh in blowing up the federal building in Oklahoma City, or of Omar Abdel-Rahman in the first effort to blow up the World Trade Center. The criminals responsible for these horrible acts were successfully tried and convicted under our criminal justice system, without the need for special procedures that altered traditional due process rights.”

In addition, Cole criticized Attorney General John Ashcroft for undermining the “protections built into our criminal-justice system.”

Also after the September 11th attacks, Cole represented Prince Naif Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, a member of the Saudi royal family, in a lawsuit filed by Motley Rice on behalf of 9/11 families. Prince Naif headed the terror-aligned Al Haramain Islamic Foundation. Between 2002 and 2004, the Treasury Department designated 13 branches of that foundation for terror ties to al Qaeda; in 2008, Treasury extended the terror designation to the entire foundation.

Just so you know what kind of snake our likely next Attorney General is.

Historic: POTUS Laughs and Fist-Bumps In Reaction To Gay Sex Joke

We can chalk this one up for another “historic first” for the Preezy of the United Steezy who never misses an opportunity to pander to a favored pressure group and show everyone how hip he is.  This is almost certainly the first time a United States president has laughed and fist-bumped in reaction to  a lewd, gay sex joke in public and apparently (although you can’t tell from the picture) in front of children.

Via The Daily Mail, because you won’t read this story in American papers.

If cutting line at a famous Austin BBQ joint lost Barack Obama a few approval rating points, the conversation he had with the cashier probably cost him even more. When Franklin Barbecue cashier Daniel Rugg Webb saw his chance to speak to the president Thursday, he exclaimed: ‘Equal rights for gay people!’ Obama then asked, ‘Are you gay.’ ‘Only when I’m having sex,’ answered the part-time comedian, which made the president laugh before he realized children were around. …

Harr-harr- oops – wait. We’re supposed to pretend we care about “the children.”

‘Not in front of the kids!’ admonished the president, before fist-bumping Webb and parting ways.

I’ve already posted one photo from this encounter, last week, but I hadn’t yet heard the “back-story.”

article-2688080-1F8D61F500000578-188_634x429

Anyone else find it a little bizarre that the president of the United States would ask a cashier at a photo-op such a private question?

Obama In MN: Pay No Attention To Those ‘Phony Scandals’ – They’re ‘Not On The Level’ (Video)

*The bear is loose and back on the permanent campaign trail to show “the folks” how hard he’s fighting for middle class families™

Speaking to a crowd in Minnesota, Thursday, Obama lamely decried “fabricated issues and phony scandals.”

“It’s all geared towards the next election or ginning up a base,” Obama muttered derisively. “Um…..it’s not on the level.”

It was a pathetic and unconvincing performance.  What  next? *”I am not a crook?”

A new Fox News Poll shows that  76% of Voters Think the IRS Emails Were Deliberately Destroyed. In other words, they think it’s his administration that’s not being “on the level.”

Via Freedom’s Lighthouse: 

Obama brought up a Minnesota  mother whose letter to the White House he used in his ongoing push to raise the minimum wage, but failed to explain how raising the minimum wage would help the accountant struggling in a stagnant, overly regulated economy.

No matter — this is why he ran, you guys – so he could help folks like this mom who reminds him of his own mom – and his g-ma, too – and he and Michelle 20 years ago. Obama reeked of insincerity as he tried to convince  his credulous audience that he could relate to middle America.

The truth? The truth is not so nice. Obama is a student of Saul Alinsky who understands that America’s white middle class is where the power lies. He not trying to help the middle class. He’s trying to destroy it. Which should be obvious, by now.

Mr. Obama has very clearly embodied Alinsky’s epiphany about the middle class. He has been pushing all the buttons of fear, division and partisanship on the one hand, and government benefits and promises of jobs on the other. The very last thing Obama wants, however, is a rising economy and people working. A good economy and jobs deflates the revolutionary possibilities. Every regulation, tax and Obama decree is geared to destroying the middle class. When people are living hand-to-mouth or living on benefits and having to jump through myriad regulatory hoops, they are unable to unite and fight the coming authoritarianism.

That is why it is so galling  to watch this guy cozy up to the middle class every election season. The very people he wants to murder, open the door and hand him the gun. It’s really quite nauseating.

* Obama keeps pushing this meme he apparently thinks has a high cool quotient: “The bear is loose!” he’s been saying for the past couple of weeks as he leaves the White House. And his fan bois in the press swoon in appreciation. “Obama said “the bear is loose, omg, isn’t that witty?!”

* It’s not my intention to defame President Nixon by comparing him to Obama. I’m just noting that Barry’s sounding comically defensive, these days.

 

Obama Serene As New Caliphate Forms In Iraq: “The world is less violent than it has ever been”

Here are a couple of disturbing videos for you on this Thursday:

Via The Gates of Vienna, a caliphate forms right before our eyes:

Meanwhile, on Planet Obama, all is well. We’ve never been better. Since Obama became the leader of the free world, it is a safer, healthier, (thanks Michelle)  more tolerant, and more educated place than ever ever before.

Obama said this at a White House event on Wednesday where he took questions from Tumblr users.

You guys are fed a lot of cynicism every single day about how nothing works and big institutions stink and government is broken. And so you channel a lot of your passion and energy into various private endeavors.

But this country has always been built both through an individual initiative, but also a sense of some common purpose. And if there’s one message I want to deliver to young people like a Tumblr audience is, don’t get cynical. Guard against cynicism. I mean, the truth of the matter is that for all the challenges we face, all the problems that we have, if you had to be — if you had to choose any moment to be born in human history, not knowing what your position was going to be, who you were going to be, you’d choose this time.  The world is less violent than it has ever been. It is healthier than it has ever been. It is more tolerant than it has ever been. It is better fed then it’s ever been. It is more educated than it’s ever been.

As I  noted at The Conversation: 

…do you think maybe the people of Iraq, Christians throughout the Middle East, soccer fans in Brazil,  people who live on the Russian/Ukrainian border, school girls in Nigeria, Pakistan, or Afghanistan, and that Marine  currently in a Mexican jail for taking a wrong turn – might have a tiny quibble with that statement?

Obama Finally Earns that 2008 Hamas Endorsement

Conventional wisdom says the heinous Bergdahl swap was green-lighted to take the heinous VA scandal off the front pages. But what if it was to distract America from another heinous foreign policy catastrophe that slipped under the radar due to Obama’s non-stop avalanche of scandals?

Mere hours after Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas swore in a government backed by the Islamic extremist Hamas group, the US State Department legitimized the arrangement, declaring that it would work with the new government because it “does not include members affiliated with Hamas.

What was saddest about Washington’s insistence on accepting Abbas’s paper-thin veneer over his government’s new nature — his “technocrat” ministers were all approved by Hamas — is that it represents only the Obama administration’s latest abrogation of leadership, logic and leverage at Israel’s expense. Rather than rushing to embrace a Palestinian government in which an unreformed Hamas is a central component, what was to stop the US conditioning its acceptance on a reform of Hamas? What was to stop Washington saying that it would be happy to work with Abbas’s new government, the moment its Hamas backers recognized Israel, accepted previous agreements and renounced terrorism? Not a particularly high bar. What was to stop the US making such a demand, one of tremendous importance to its ally Israel? Only its incomprehensible reluctance to do.

What if it came out that the  Obama Administration Has Been Holding Talks With Hamas For Six Months?

The two Palestinian factions, Fatah and the terrorist group Hamas, formed a unity government this week in the West Bank.

US law restricts aid from going to the Hamas terrorist group.

Then there’s this…
The Obama administration has been holding talks with Hamas terrorists for six months.
BuzzFeed reported:

United States officials have been holding secret back-channel talks with Hamas over the last six months to discuss their role in the newly formed unity government, according to two senior diplomatic sources with direct knowledge of the talks.

The meetings were held between U.S. intermediaries and Hamas’ leadership, which lives outside the Gaza Strip in third-party countries ranging from Egypt to Qatar and Jordan. Topics included the ceasefire agreement with Israel and the recently formed unity government between Hamas and Fatah.

Flashback to April 2008 when the terrorist group Hamas endorsed candidate Obama, creating all sorts of awkwardness for him:

During an interview on WABC radio Sunday, top Hamas political adviser Ahmed Yousef said the terrorist group supports Obama’s foreign policy vision.

“We don’t mind–actually we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will (win) the election and I do believe he is like John Kennedy, great man with great principle, and he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community but not with domination and arrogance,” Yousef said in response to a question about the group’s willingness to meet with either of the Democratic presidential candidates.

That was from my Radicals, Terrorists And Tyrants Of The World Root For Obama opus from April of 2008, posted when I noticed a pattern of very unsavory groups and characters coalescing around the goon we now have as president.

For all the good it did…

 

 

Every Obama Statement Comes With An Expiration Date – Taliban Swap Edition

Long ago, it was determined that every Obama statement comes with an expiration date – but must he always be so sickeningly predictable?

In May of  2008, candidate Barack Obama took great offense to comments made by then President George Bush in a speech before Israel’s Knesset. Bush had said; “some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along … We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”

At the time, (I remember it well) the entire Democrat Media complex, led by Obama heaped opprobrium on Bush for making such a harsh statement on foreign soil – even though it wasn’t clear in his remarks to whom he was referring.

The Obama campaign released a stinging statement – calling Bush’s words “a false political attack” while stressing how committed he was to “our ally Israel.”

“It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 6Oth anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack. It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel. Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power — including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy – to pressure countries like Iran and Syria. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the President’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.”

Failed candidate Hillary Clinton piled on:

“On the face of it and especially in light of his failures in foreign policy, this is the kind of statement that has no place in any presidential address and certainly to use an important moment like the 60th anniversary celebration of Israel to make a political point seems terribly misplaced,” said the New York Senator during an impromptu gaggle with reporters. “Unfortunately this is what we’ve come to expect from President Bush who has refused to change course in Iraq, neglected Afghanistan and failed to provide leadership on the range of important issues that face our country and the world.”

Not to be outdone, Joey “Choo Choo” Biden called Bush’s words, “bullshit”, “malarkey” , outrageous”, and “ridiculous.”

“This is bullshit, this is malarkey. This is outrageous, for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, to sit in the Knesset … and make this kind of ridiculous statement.”

It all had a very “thou doth protest too much” quality to it.

Now we know why.

With the recent announcement that U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdhal has been released by the Taliban in exchange for 5 “high-risk” terrorists, engaging with terrorists has become a reality.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) has stated that the administration flat-out “negotiated with terrorists,” a tactic that marks a “fundamental shift in U.S. policy.”

And by shift, he means unlawful.

Just last year, outgoing Press Sec. Jay Carney promised, WH Will Consult with Congress on Gitmo Transfer.

Just under a year ago, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney promised that any decision with respect to the release of Guantanamo Bay detainees in exchange for kidnapped Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl would be made in consultation with Congress.

CARNEY: With regard to the transfer of Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay, we have made — the United States has not made the decision to do that, though we do expect the Taliban to raise this issue in our discussion, if and when those discussions happen.

As we have long said, however, we would not make any decisions about transfer of any detainees without consulting with Congress and without doing so in accordance with U.S. law.

Q    So you haven’t ruled it out?

CARNEY:  I’m simply saying that — first of all, you have to separate the two issues.  We are focused on the return  — the safe and immediate return of Sergeant Bergdahl, and we continue to use the tools at our disposal to help bring that about.

We also expect the Taliban to raise the issue of their detainees in discussions that we have with them if those discussions take place.  And at this time we’ve made no decisions about the transfer of detainees.

And in accordance with law, we would be consulting with Congress should we make any decisions about that.  So we remain committed to the closure of Guantanamo Bay, as you know.  But separate from that on these specific issues about individual detainees, that would be a process that is done in accordance with law.

Well, you know that turned out –  the White House this week sent five dangerous former Taliban commanders to Qatar to hang loose for a year without a word to lawmakers.

Two more Obama statements that reached their expiration dates – and George Bush, by the way –  totally vindicated:

“some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along … We have an obligation to call this what it is – the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”

Yes, Obama will be discredited by history. Unfortunately, we all have to suffer through his completely FUBAR presidency until he’s gone.

SEE ALSO:

Weasel Zippers: Officer: Soldiers Were “Threatened” If They Questioned Story of Bergdahl’s Capture, Forced To Sign Non-Disclosure Agreements…

Mediaite: Jeffrey Toobin: Obama ‘Clearly Broke the Law’ on Bergdahl

PJM: Jonathan Turley: Not much debate the White House is ‘in violation of the law’

Jake Tapper, The Lead: Former Army Sgt. who served with Bergdahl: ‘He is at best a deserter, at worst a traitor’

John Bolton,  New York Post: The high cost of Obama’s reckless Taliban swap

Marc Thiessen, Washington Post: Here’s what happens when Taliban leaders are released

Duffleblog: Meteorologists Forecast Bowe Bergdahl Shit Storm

Gateway Pundit: Dick Cheney: I Never Would Have Supported the Taliban Trade for “AWOL” Bergdahl (Video)

Weasel Zippers: REPORT: Pentagon In 2010 Concluded Bowe Bergdahl Deserted His Post, Stopped Military Efforts To Rescue Him…

Twitchy: ‘Most dishonest tweet ever’: Chris Hayes shredded for question about ‘right-wing’ reaction to Bergdahl story

Instapundit: HMM: Sources: Intelligence community investigated Bergdahl’s conduct. “Many within the intelligence community harbor serious outstanding concerns not only that Bergdahl may have been a deserter but that he may have been an active collaborator with the enemy.”

 Bowe Bergdahl and His Father Have Some Explaining To Do

When I saw Bowe Bergdahl’s father on the news yesterday – with his Talibanesque beard speaking Arabic (supposedly so he could better relate to his son’s captors) I thought, “okay…something is wrong with this picture.”

The good news of his son’s release was tempered by the fact that Obama released five Gitmo prisoners in exchange. Later in the day, when we found out who those prisoners were- five top Taliban commanders – some of whom had committed war crimes – all of whom were deemed to be a risk to Americans – the “good” news was tempered even further.

Then more and more information came out about Bowe – who had deserted his company in the middle of the night and walked straight into the arms of the Taliban, and the whole thing really began to stink.

Now we discover this deleted tweet from dad.

free-guantanimo-prisoners-tweet-zigler

 Something is definitely wrong with this picture.

SEE ALSO:

PJ Media:Taliban Joyous Over Bergdahl Swap, Vows to Get All Mujahideen Released ASAP  

Michelle Malkin: Flashback: A reminder about Bowe Bergdahl’s desertion problem

The NY Post: The bizarre tale of America’s last known POW

Weasel Zippers: Taliban Claimed Bergdahl Converted To Islam And Was Teaching Them Bomb-Making Techniques

The Daily Caller: Obama Submits To Taliban Demands, Allows Praise For Allah

Obama used a Rose Garden press event to tout the surprise trade — which he won by making critical, last-minute concessions — while the parents of the freed soldier, Bowe Bergdahl, stood alongside.

At the end of brief event, the soldier’s father, Bob Bergdahl, recited the most frequent phrase in the Koran — “Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim” —which means “In the name of Allah, most Gracious, most Compassionate.”

After Bergdahl finished his statement and his praise for Allah, Obama hugged him.

Sooper Mexican: American Soldier Who Served With Freed POW Casts Doubt on Official Story; Fears Reprisal From Obama Administration

 

And Via This Ain’t Hell - in the comment section:

I found this post a few months ago and did some research…it all seems to pan out:

I WAS THERE. I’m sick of all the lies. Here is the TRUTH, from someone on the ground. We were at OP Mest, Paktika Province, Afghanistan. It was a small outpost where B Co 1-501st INF (Airbone) ran operations out of, just an Infantry platoon and ANA counterparts there. The place was an Afghan graveyard. Bergdahl had been acting a little strange, telling people he wanted to “walk the earth” and kept a little journal talking about how he was meant for better things. No one thought anything about it. He was a little “out there”. Next morning he’s gone. We search everywhere, and can’t find him. He left his weapon, his kit, and other sensitive items. He only took some water, a compass and a knife. We find some afghan kids shortly after who saw an american walking north asking about where the taliban are. We get hits on our voice intercepter that Taliban has him, and we were close. We come to realize that the kid deserted his post, snuck out of camp and sought out Taliban… to join them. We were in a defensive position at OP Mest, where your focus is to keep people out. He knew where the blind spots were to slip out and that’s what he did. It was supposed to be a 4-day mission but turned into several months of active searching. Everyone was spun up to find this guy. News outlets all over the country were putting out false information. It was hard to see, especially when we knew the truth about what happened and we lost good men trying to find him. PFC Matthew Michael Martinek, Staff Sgt. Kurt Robert Curtiss, SSG Clayton Bowen, PFC Morris Walker, SSG Michael Murphrey, 2LT Darryn Andrews, were all KIA from our unit who died looking for Bergdahl. Many others from various units were wounded or killed while actively looking for Bergdahl. Fighting Increased. IEDs and enemy ambushes increased. The Taliban knew that we were looking for him in high numbers and our movements were predictable. Because of Bergdahl, more men were out in danger, and more attacks on friendly camps and positions were conducted while we were out looking for him. His actions impacted the region more than anyone wants to admit. There is also no way to know what he told the Taliban: Our movements, locations, tactics, weak points on vehicles and other things for the enemy to exploit are just a few possibilities. The Government knows full well that he deserted. It looks bad and is a good propaganda piece for the Taliban. They refuse to acknowledge it. Hell they even promoted him to Sergeant which makes me sick. I feel for his family who only want their son/brother back. They don’t know the truth, or refuse to acknowledge it as well. What he did affected his family and his whole town back home, who don’t know the truth. Either way what matters is that good men died because of him. He has been lying on all those Taliban videos about everything since his “capture”. If he ever returns, he should be tried under the UCMJ for being a deserter and judged for what he did. Bergdahl is not a hero, he is not a soldier or an Infantryman. He failed his brothers. Now, sons and daughters are growing up without their fathers who died for him and he will have to face that truth someday.

Linked by Doug Ross, thanks!

Z-Street Donor Tells Tale Of IRS Harassment

A court decision handed down by an Obama appointed judge, Tuesday, will force the IRS to disclose the procedures it used to target the pro-Israel group, Z-Street, and may shed more light on how other conservative groups were unfairly scrutinized.

Z Street’s lawsuit was filed years before the IRS scandal hit the news and  before the conservative media understood how badly the agency had become weaponized under Obama.

Jonathan Tobin of Commentary reported:

 On Tuesday, Federal Judge Ketanje Brown Jackson issued the first substantive ruling in any suit that challenged the IRS’s pose of political neutrality under the Obama administration. The case concerns Z Street, a Philadelphia area-based pro-Israel organization that filed for tax-exempt status in December 2009 because of its role in educating the public about Israel and the Middle East conflict. The group’s founder Lori Lowenthal Marcus wrote in the Jewish Press this week about what followed:

On July 19, 2010, when counsel for Z STREET spoke with the IRS agent to whom the organization’s application had been assigned, that agent said that a determination on Z STREET’s application may be further delayed because the IRS gave “special scrutiny” to organizations connected to Israel and especially to those whose views “contradict those of the administration’s.”

Z Street subsequently sued the government and rightly argued that its constitutional rights had been violated because of the “viewpoint discrimination” that the IRS agent had openly displayed. Now after years of delays, Judge Jackson has ruled that by asserting that Z Street had no right to sue, the government had tried to “transform a lawsuit that clearly challenges the constitutionality of the process … into a dispute over tax liability.” She similarly dismissed the government’s claims of sovereign immunity.

This ruling means the IRS will be forced to open their books on the procedures it used to review Z-Street’s tax exempt application and as the case proceeds, the entire picture involving other groups similarly targeted may become clearer.

 The New English Review, which has been following this case, shared an “unsolicited anecdote” they received from an anonymous party who had contributed funds for Z Street’s lawsuit.

NER said  “it is indicative of how the IRS endeavors to abuse its authority to intimidate well meaning citizens who elect to support and defend free speech rights under the First Amendment.”

Here is the story:

In 2010, we contributed to this lawsuit that Z Street lodged against the US IRS being aware that forces under the radar were working to subvert free speech about many social-political issues within America.

So, subsequently and not surprisingly, we were harassed by the IRS even though our documentation was prepared by and reconfirmed by our accountant and financial institution. We contested the IRS’s findings and their response was to give us a court date to appear for a resolution.

Meanwhile, we didn’t hire legal counsel as many activists before us had done and gone bankrupt. Instead, we bet on the IRS’s bad press like the media’s exposure of similarly hassled conservative and pro-Israel groups would see this through for us.

Our wait seems to have paid off.

Before our court date, we received an afterhour’s call from a very pleasant and cheerful woman from the IRS, who said our case was a “misunderstanding” and papers would follow showing we owed a minor amount, instead of the colossal number they had levied on us!!! Over the next week or so, papers were sent and we responded. Nothing new in months, so we may be home free. Despite the experience, instead of silencing us, we are more driven to support and ensure free speech.!

So, best of luck for Z Street. We appreciate having our Constitution respected, honored, and upheld.

Changing it should take place within Congress, not within the IRS. This is what Z Street’s suit is about.

Washington attorney, Cleta Mitchell was recently on the Kelly File to discuss this newest  front In IRS Scandal: Nearly 1 in 10 conservative donors were audited by the IRS.

I noted that the list of conservatives targeted by the Internal Revenue Service for audits, excessive tax-exempt scrutiny, or tax privacy breaches included Tea party groups and their donors, the conservative Hollywood group, Friends of AbeFranklin Graham,Christine O’Donnell, a pro-marriage group,  Dr. Ben CarsonDr. Milton Wolf ,  (Obama’s Republican cousin who is running for Senate in KS), and ObamaCare critics Bill Elliot and C. Steven Tucker.

We can now add to that list, donors to Z Street’s legal fund.

As Cleta told Megyn Kelly,  “this is an area I’ve been increasingly concerned about in the last year since this scandal broke because people have contacted me from all over the country, talking about how they had never been audited before they donated to a conservative organization.”

 

Project Veritas Exposes Hollywood Hypocrisy: Lefty Actors Accept Dirty Mideast Oil Money For Anti-Fracking Film

okeefe

James O’Keefe has done it again. This time he dove into perhaps the most influential bastion of progressive power – Hollywood –  and exposed the dark and slimy underbelly behind their anti-fracking machine.

O’Keefe, (pictured above) premiered “Hollywood’s War on US Energy” to a packed room at the Cannes Film Festival, earlier today.

Via Project Veritas:

In the investigation, an undercover journalist from Project Veritas posed as a member of a Middle Eastern oil dynasty and offered $9 million in funding to American filmmakers to fund an anti-fracking movie.

In video from a meeting with Ed Begley Jr., Mariel Hemingway and Josh Tickell, a Project Veritas investigator disguised as “Muhammed” offered $9 million for an anti-fracking film. “Muhammad” clearly states: “If Washington DC continues fracking, America will be energy efficient, and then they won’t need my oil anymore.”

In the same conversation, Begley and Hemingway accept the funding and agree to hide the source of funds for the anti-fracking movie. Hemingway agreeing that those who will know the source of the funding are “only at this table.”

Ed Begley Jr. is an outspoken environmental activist and current Governor on the board of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science (the organization that brings us the OSCARS every year.)

Mariel Hemingway is a Golden Globe- and Oscar-nominated actress.

Josh Tickell is a Sundance Film Festival Winner and the director of environmental message movies “Fuel”, “The Big Fix” and “PUMP”.

Team Begley even submitted a video of Oscar-nominated actor Mark Ruffalo offering his unwavering support for the fictitious anti-fracking film project.

The meeting came about after a series of discussions with Josh and Rebecca Tickell. A Project Veritas journalist posed as an ad executive seeking to broker a deal for his client (“Muhammed”) to fund an American-made anti-fracking film.

The raw video can be found at http://Youtube.com/VeritasVisuals

This is so hilarious. Anyone with any sense already knew that Ed Begley Jr was a giant pretentious, phony poser. This O’Keefe sting proves it – and discredits the whole Hollywood anti-fracking franchise.

The only hitch is — most of the fellow-traveling MSM are as dishonest and corrupt as they are. Will anyone outside Fox News report on this?

The Hollywood Reporter already has.

Via Big Hollywood: the hypocritical movie makers are already defending their intentions to create an anti-fracking film funded by Middle Eastern oil interests.  Ed Begley Jr argues that there’s nothing wrong with taking Middle Eastern oil money (strongly suspect he’s done it before) because he’s spent his whole sainted life fighting against Middle Eastern oil. And he takes a swipe at O’Keefe (and by extension a large percentage of Americans who drive big cars) for driving “gas guzzlers.” We should be more like the blameless Ed Begley Jr. who rides his bike and drives an electric car, everywhere.

In a statement to the Hollywood Reporter, Begely defended Tickell’s actions.

“I don’t think it’s bad Josh Tickell is taking money from some Arab guy. It’s much better than giving money to Middle East oil, which I’ve spent my whole life against,” he said. “Think about it. My electric car. My bicycle. How much foreign oil is there in that? Unlike these James O’Keefe characters who ride around in gas guzzlers, I’ve given no money to foreign oil.”

What a doosh.

More reaction from Begley via HR: – he’s totally innocent because he’s hard of hearing and didn’t even hear what was being said, you guyz!!1!

Begley tells THR that if it looks like he’s agreeing with faux Muhammad about anything, it’s because the Tickells asked him to be polite so that they’d get their funding for a movie they’re making calledFracked, a film that will argue a technique for extracting natural gas called fracking is bad for the environment. Also, Begley says that he is hard of hearing and couldn’t understand everything Muhammad was saying.

“Smoke and mirrors…”

These slimeballs and their managers are fuming – threatening legal action – but check the comments at The Hollywood Reporter – they’re cheering on James O’Keefe.

Dismantling the Left’s Dishonest Obama-Defense Strategies

o scandals

Kudos to Kyle Becker of IJ Review for doing the fact-checking on the left’s ’13 Benghazis That Happened Under Bush’ Viral Meme.

Many of us have seen the narratives refuting “Benghazigate.”

“Where was the outrage about all those embassy attacks under Bush? What about all the people killed in those attacks? Where was Fox News then?”

Let’s put aside for now that this line of questioning has nothing at all to do with why people are concerned about what happened during and after the Benghazi terror attack.

All 13 false equivalencies are picked apart, here.

Of course there were attacks on US Embassies in terrorist hot spots throughout the world during the Bush era. We were fighting two hot wars as part of what used to be called – “the global war on terror.” But there were major differences between these attacks and Benghazi, including the fact that in most of the examples no Americans died, there were no requests for more security that were  ignored, and there was no active cover-up after the attack. They were not “just like Benghazi” at all.

Bush readily admitted that we were fighting a global war on terror. But Obama wanted the nation to think that he had decisively won the war after  Osama Bin Laden was assassinated. The war on terror was over. Now, we just had overseas contingencies and workplace violence and demonstrations over Youtube videos.

___

The left  uses dishonest defense strategies to protect Obama and they have used them time and time again to explain away his scandals. They mischaracterize past events to draw some sort of moral equivalency – which often involves blaming Bush.  It looks good on the surface, but falls apart upon close scrutiny. But it doesn’t matter how weak their false equivalency is, because the strategy is geared toward BDS-ridden O-bots who are inclined to agree with them and not do any independent fact-checking. They just want to be spoon-fed what to think, and the Alinskyites running the show right now, are happy to provide them with the nonsensical pablum they need to fulfill their preconceived notions about a world in which every enemy has an R after his name.

____

Perhaps the first time the left used this strategy to protect Obama came after Holder’s DOJ dropped the charges against the New Black Panthers in what one Justice Dept lawyer described as a slam dunk case the clearest case of voter intimidation he had ever seen..

The charges stemmed from an incident at a Philadelphia polling place on Election Day 2008 when three members of the party were accused of trying to threaten voters and block poll and campaign workers by the threat of force — one even brandishing what prosecutors call a deadly weapon.

The three black panthers, Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson were charged in a civil complaint in the final days of the Bush administration with violating the voter rights act by using coercion, threats and intimidation. Shabazz allegedly held a nightstick or baton that prosecutors said he pointed at people and menacingly tapped it. Prosecutors also say he “supports racially motivated violence against non-blacks and Jews.”

The Obama administration won the case last month, but moved to dismiss the charges on May 15.

Believe it or not – the left tried to blame Bush for the decision – forcing conservative bloggers like Delroy Murdock to waste time slapping down their idiotic false narrative:

Olbermann, recently fired Washington Post analyst Dave Weigel, and The American Prospect’s Adam Serwer have all crowed that Bush’s Justice Department dropped a criminal case against the NBPP. In fact, there never was a criminal case to drop. The NBPP faced a civil lawsuit prepared by Justice’s Voting Rights unit. This is exactly what career prosecutors recommended in the first place.

With respect to all but one defendant, Justice abandoned its civil case under Obama, not Bush — no matter what Olbermann and his comrades would like to believe.  

______

During the Fast and Furious gun-walking scandal, in which thousands of high powered guns were allowed to fall into the hands of criminal gun cartels, Democrats constantly tried to argue that the Obama administration’s Operation F & F,  was a continuation of  “Wide Receiver”, a failed gun-tracing operation that the ATF briefly tried under George W. Bush. Democrats often used the Wide Receiver narrative during Congressional hearings, and Jay Carney used it when questioned by reporters during press briefings.

They were lying.

Besides the fact that they were two separate operations,  Wide Receiver actually made an attempt to track the guns that were headed into Mexico - guns  were implanted with RFID chips and were tracked electronically. The ATF in Phoenix also implemented aerial surveillance tactics in an attempt to follow the weapons.

Obama’s ATF  took no such steps to track the walked guns other than recording the serial numbers before allowing them to cross the border into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.  ATF agents involved with Fast and Furious would later testify that they were ordered to stand down and not track the weapons even when interdiction was possible.  The objective was to get them into the hands of drug cartel bandits only to be interdicted after they had killed people – at which point, they were  traced back to the gun shops that sold the guns to straw purchasers (at the ATF’s behest.) It was not a “botched operation. It was totally effed up from the start.

The Bush administration also worked in cooperation with the Mexican government. When about 200 guns were lost track of – the operation was terminated in 2007.

Mexican authorities were kept in the dark over Fast and Furious and were outraged when the details about the criminally insane operation were revealed. The operation started in the Fall of 2009 and not terminated until Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered with one of the Fast and Furious Guns in December of 2010.

A good question for Eric Holder would be why would the DOJ resurrect a program like Wide Receiver after it failed  -  but he would tell you he had no idea about it or Operation Fast and Furious.  He testified that he didn’t even know about Fast and Furious until well after Brian Terry’s death in Dec. 2010.  Any emails that might say otherwise have been protected by Executive Privilege.

There are still liberal drones out there who will knowingly tell you that Fast and Furious is a GW Bush scandal because it was a continuation of a Bush era gun-walking operation.

____

Remember Solyndra? The solar company that went belly-up after the Obama administration awarded them with an ill-advised half a billion dollars  loan? That was Bush’s fault, too, you know.

After spending months touting the Obama administration’s decision to loan $535 million to the California solar energy upstart Solyndra, top officials took a new tack Wednesday while testifying before Congress about the company’s abrupt shut-down and bankruptcy: the loan, they said, was actually the Bush administration’s idea. The Energy Department’s top lending officer told Congress that the Solyndra loan application was not only filed during President Bush’s term, but it surged towards completion before Obama took office in January 2009.

“By the time the Obama administration took office in late January 2009, the loan programs’ staff had already established a goal of, and timeline for, issuing the company a conditional loan guarantee commitment in March 2009,” said Jonathan Silver, who heads the Energy loan program.

It was a key part of the Democrats’ pushback over the Solyndra scandal. Dems argued that the loan guarantees made to the solar panel company were just as much the doing of the George W. Bush administration as they were of the Obama administration.

This argument has been pushed repeatedly by the Democrats on the Energy and Commerce committee, by liberal groups like Media Matters and even by the Energy Department itself, which has been emailing reporters regular press releases spinning the scandal.

For example, Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce investigation subcommittee, asked Friday, “Whether the Bush and Obama administration conducted due diligence on the loan guarantee.”

But the facts don’t justify this claim. The bottom line remains that the Bush Administration did not approve the Solyndra loan guarantee. And just before they headed out of town, Bush officials ordered the project back to the drawing board.

Democrats argue the Energy Department first received the loan request in December 2006. By January 2009, it was still under consideration. That month, the department’s Loan Guarantee Credit Committee put the project on hold.

IBD concluded, “there were two administrations involved in this project. One, after more than two years of consideration, was still sending it back for further review. That was the Bush administration. The second was placing “intense pressure” on department staff to approve loans from the moment it walked in the door and even had the energy secretary himself personally reviewing each loan. That was the Obama administration.”

It would be like a Republican administration coming into office after Obama, immediately approving the Keystone Pipeline, and when something horrible goes wrong – trying to share the blame with Obama because he’s the one who  “established the goal” of approving the pipeline.

___

The IRS Scandal: One  defense strategy the left has employed to defend the Obama Regime  is the laughable “Progressive groups were targeted too!” false narrative. I’ve actually seen them try to argue that progressive groups were targeted even more than conservative groups. I mean if you’re going to lie – go big, right?

 NO progressive groups were unfairly targeted by IRS

This would already seem obvious given the fact that absolutely no progressive groups have come forward with horror stories about the abuse they supposedly endured as a result of being targeted and unfairly scrutinized. Congressional Democrats had every opportunity to let this alleged multitude of “progressive IRS victims” testify before various committees during several hearings that have been held on Capitol Hill on the scandal. Not-so-shockingly, no progressive victims have been identified and none ever testified..  Because they don’t exist.

There are still liberal drones who spread that particular brazen lie in the comment sections of our nation’s newspapers.

_____

Be on the look-out for this particular defense strategy. Now that we see the pattern, it should be obvious when we see them employing it.

The VA scandal is in its infancy, but I fully expect the left to blame the scandal on Bush era policies that Obama is heroically fixing. If they haven’t done that already.

America-Bashing Communist Speaks At Portland State University Event

At a  “Law and Disorder” conference at Portland State University, May 10, students were treated to the anti-capitalist rantings of one Nehandra Imara of the All African People’s Revolutionary Party – which I’m guessing is some sort of far-left, race-baiting, Commie  party.

Oh yes – I’m correct. 

The All-African People’s Revolutionary Party (A-APRP) is a “mass socialist party” that was founded by Dr. Kwame Nkrumah “to create and manage the political-economic conditions necessary to the emergence of an All-African People’s Revolutionary Army that would lead the military struggle against neo-colonialism, settler colonialism, zionism, imperialism and all other forms of capitalist oppression and exploitation.” A-APRP advocates “Pan-Africanism,” which it defines as “the total liberation and unification of Africa under Scientific Socialism.” Scientific Socialism, according to A-APRP, is “a new social synthesis in which … [an] advanced technical society is realized without the staggering social malefactions and deep schisms of capitalist industrial society.” A-APRP reveres the Communist Vietnamese leader Ho Chi Minh, former Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, and Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. The organization has branches in several countries and several U.S. states.

Embracing the concept of Black Power as “a new stage of revolutionary consciousness,” A-APRP supports reparations payments to contemporary African Americans as compensation for the evils of slavery. According to A-APRP, “Africans born/living outside of Africa have been deliberately kept ignorant of Africa and her achievements by European capitalism for centuries. The purpose of such action was to paint a picture of Africa as a savage land and to force Africans to disassociate themselves from their homeland. … By exploiting our labor, our minds, and the rich resources of our homeland, the world’s greedy capitalists live a life of splendor. By keeping us divided, disorganized, confused and living under stifling conditions, they try to halt our progress towards the total freedom of Africa and our people.”

Viewing the United States as the focus of evil in the modern world, A-APRP characterizes Israel as America’s chief partner in inflicting misery and suffering on populations around the globe. “While 50% of Africans in the USA live on or under the poverty line,” says A-APRP, “$8 billion is sent to Israel, which is used to oppress the Palestinian people.” “The Western imperialists,” adds Nkrumah’s organization, “led by the USA, funnel money and military weapons through Israel to South Africa to slaughter our children. Imperialism operates on a global perspective. Secret agencies of Britain, France, Israel, South Africa, USA conduct joint military action against Africans.”

“Dominant, racist, western narrative…Capitalism is an evil system… Capitalism is the root of all evils,”  Nehandra ImaraIt  told the impressionable students.

“Capitalism is a failed system! Would you agree?”  she asked, leading them in a group chant.

Via TPNN:

“Yes!” agreed the audience, obviously full of progressive useful idiots and dupes. “Alright, I’m in good company,” gleefully chuckled the anti-American communist Imara.

“Capitalism is an evil system,” Imara begins the meat of her anti-freedom rant. “Capitalism is the root of all evils. It is built on unjust racist, classist, sexist system off of 400 years of illegal [ineligible] slavery of African people.”

“It is militaristic terrorism on steroids,” Imara, says about economic freedom. while referring to herself as not American, but as “African or Pan-African.”

Watch the whole thing. Universities have become a breeding ground for this sort of nasty, America-hating, Marxist revolutionary clap-trap.

The American University is where all left wing points of view are listened to and  respected, but  conservative, Christian or even moderate Republican  points of view are reviled – just ask Condoleezza Rice.

Hat tip: Brian B.

IRS Scandal Heats Up As Newly Released Emails Prove Targeting Was Directed Out of DC (Video)

Judicial Watch, the same group that recently forced the White House to release those damning email exchanges related to the Benghazi attack, just published some  newly uncovered communications regarding the IRS targeting of conservative groups. The emails, which were obtained  in response to an October 2013 Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit filed after the agency refused to respond to four FOIA requests dating back to May 2013. Reading the emails, you can see why they stonewalled. They prove without a doubt that the handling of Tea Party applications was directed out of the agency’s headquarters in Washington, DC.  and that “extensive pressure” was put on the IRS by Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) to shut down conservative-leaning tax-exempt organizations. 

One key email string from July 2012 confirms that IRS Tea Party scrutiny was directed from Washington, DC. On July 6, 2010, Holly Paz (the former Director of the IRS Rulings and Agreements Division and current Manager of Exempt Organizations Guidance) asks IRS lawyer Steven Grodnitzky “to let Cindy and Sharon know how we have been handling Tea Party applications in the last few months.”  Cindy Thomas is the former director of the IRS Exempt Organizations office in Cincinnati and Sharon Camarillo was a Senior Manager in their Los Angeles office. Grodnitzky, a top lawyer in the Exempt Organization Technical unit (EOT) in Washington, DC, responds:

EOT is working the Tea party applications in coordination with Cincy. We are developing a few applications here in DC and providing copies of our development letters with the agent to use as examples in the development of their cases. Chip Hull [another lawyer in IRS headquarters] is working these cases in EOT and working with the agent in Cincy, so any communication should include him as well. Because the Tea party applications are the subject of an SCR [Sensitive Case Report], we cannot resolve any of the cases without coordinating with Rob.

The reference to Rob is believed to be Rob Choi, then-Director of Rulings and Agreements in IRS’s Washington, DC, headquarters.

The Daily Caller reported:

Levin, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs’ permanent subcommittee on investigations, wrote a March 30, 2012 letter to then-IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman discussing the “urgency” of the issue of possible political activity by nonprofit applicants. Levin asked if the IRS was sending out additional information requests to applicant groups and citing an IRS rejection letter to a conservative group as an example of how the IRS should be conducting its business.

Bill Hemmer reported on the scandal Thursday morning on Fox News:



Senator Ted Cruz’s press release in full:

New Emails Escalate Need for Special Prosecutor

Sen Cruz: A special prosecutor with real independence should be appointed immediately

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, today made the following statement regarding new emails between IRS employees and other government officials released by a watchdog group.

“After emails showed that Lois Lerner was communicating directly with the Department of Justice, I sent Attorney General Holder a letter asking him to reconsider his decision to not appoint a special prosecutor in the IRS targeting scandal. And now today more emails have surfaced, this time showing that IRS targeting of Tea Party groups was coordinated from Washington D.C.—contrary to the Administration’s initial story that this was all done by lower ranking IRS officials in Cincinnati.

“So we now know the Department of Justice was involved with the IRS targeting, and the Administration’s initial explanation about the targeting was false. This Administration has lost all credibility to investigate this partisan scandal, especially given that they have entrusted the investigation to be led by a major Democratic donor. A special prosecutor with real independence should be appointed immediately.”

MORE: 

SEE ALSO:

John Hayward, The Conversation: A new chapter in the IRS scandal begins:

Once again, I’m struck by how well Obama’s delaying tactics work to protect him from scandals that could have brought down his Administration.  He and his team of paid liars long ago hit on the tactic of living from one news cycle to the next – a deliberate reversal of the old Washington wisdom that it’s better to dump everything at once (preferably in a literal dumpster out back of the White House, on a Friday afternoon, ideally before a holiday weekend) to avoid the corrosive drip-drip-drip of scandal.  Old Washington hands thought it was dangerous to drag these things out and keep them in the news; better to muscle through a round of tough Sunday shows and get it over with, instead of seeing stories about “new revelations in Whatever-gate” on the front pages, week after week.

Newsbusters: Networks Censor Bombshell Documents Showing Top Democrat Pressed IRS to Target Conservatives

Coverage by the Big Three (ABC, NBC, CBS) networks on their Wednesday evening and Thursday morning shows? 0 seconds.

***
While the networks refused to cover the new revelations in the IRS scandal they did devote a total of 11 minutes (ABC: 4 minutes,19 seconds; CBS: 4 minutes, 19 seconds; NBC: 4 minutes, 8 seconds) to defending Hillary Clinton from Republican attacks on their Wednesday evening and Thursday morning shows.

 

Confirmed: Benghazi Documents Point to White House on Susan Rice’s Bogus Talking Points

Fox News’ Catherine Herridge reported on some new developments via Judicial Watch in the investigation into the Sept. 2012 Benghazi attack, including the release of documents that lead directly to the White House. 

You will be not surprised to find that White House “fixer” Ben Rhodes wrote the memo emphasizing the importance of the youtube video  to Obama’s paid hacks, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, Deputy Press Secretary Joshua Earnest, then-White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, then-White House Deputy Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri, then-National Security Council Director of Communications Erin Pelton, Special Assistant to the Press Secretary Howli Ledbetter, and then-White House Senior Advisor and political strategist Davie Plouffe to disseminate to the public. In other words, the entire White House communications staff – public servants who work for the American people –  provided political cover to the Regime during an election year, rather than provide the best information they had on an issue of great national importance, to the American public. 

 Under the subject “prep call with Susan,” Rhodes wrote that the goal for Rice’s appearances on Sunday talk shows would be “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure or policy.”

The message was sent three days after the attacks, which left four Americans dead at a U.S. consulate and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya.

Days later, Rice would go on numerous Sunday news programs, including on Fox News Sunday, to falsely assert that the Benghazi attack was spontaneous and occurred during a protest over an anti-Islam video. Since that time, the White House has come under fierce criticism from Republicans, who allege that the administration altered the CIA’s talking points about how the Benghazi attack unfolded.

We now know that the attacks had nothing to do with the video, and everything to do with the Regime’s failure to secure and defend the compound in Benghazi.

These people are disgusting.

You have to wonder – was it worth it to the Regime to invent the YouTube story?  - Since so many of us knew it was BS from the start, and it’s just one more scandal to add to the their impressive list of scandals?  But then – when I say “so many of us” I’m not talking about the public, at large, am I? The MSM went to bat for the Regime in the wake of the Benghazi attack – in many cases acting like unpaid members of Obama’s communication team (Candy Crowley comes to mind.)  In the end, it would seem that the lies helped Obama limp across the finish line because most people believed the lies that the White House and the media disseminated.

FLASHBACK to Feb 23, 2013: Susan Rice – No Regrets over Benghazi Remarks:

President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, said on Sunday she was not “100 percent correct” in her remarks after the deadly 2012 attack on a U.S. compound in Libya, but called it patently false to say she intentionally misled Americans about the incident.

Republican critics were not satisfied with her explanation, with Senator John McCain proclaiming himself “almost speechless.”

On Sept. 11, 2012, an attack by militants killed four Americans at the U.S. mission in Benghazi, including American Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Just days later, Rice appeared on news shows and stated that the attack was the work of a spontaneous crowd, instead of Islamic militants.

When Rice’s 2012 account proved incorrect, Republican lawmakers accused her of trying to protect Obama during his re-election campaign, which the White House disputed.

Appearing on the NBC program “Meet the Press” on Sunday, Rice said, “I commented that this was based on what we knew on that morning (and) was provided to me and my colleagues – and indeed to Congress – by the intelligence community. And that’s been well validated in many different ways since.”

“And that information turned out, in some respects, not to be 100 percent correct. But the notion that somehow I or anybody else in the administration misled the American people is patently false,” she added.

Rice said she did not have any regrets about the 2012 comments. She also said the United States remains committed to catching the perpetrators of the attack. “And we will stay on it until this gets done,” she added.

Does it make you rest easy at night knowing that this woman is the president’s National Security Advisor?

Media Obsesses Over Chelsea Clinton’s Baby News – Ignores IRS/DOJ Email Bombshell

After word broke last Thursday night that Chelsea Clinton is an expectant mother, media outlets reacted with predictable over-enthusiasm for America’s new “royal” child.

Via Big Government, the video below features how media figures from ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN reacted to the news:

Does anyone remember this much coverage when GW Bush’s daughter, Jenna became an expectant mother?

Now, I am as happy for the expectant couple as anyone, but the story really only warrants a brief mention in the news, and obviously well wishes – not extensive coverage at the expense of more important stories.

Newsbusters reported that ABC has fixated over the news, devoting 12 minutes and 47 seconds of coverage of the story but ignored news of the latest delay of the Keystone XL pipeline by the Obama administration which has been heavily criticized by Republicans and vulnerable Red State Democrats.

On Friday morning, ABC reporter Bianna Golodryga hyped, “Move over, Prince George, though. This morning, Americans have their own royal, or, rather, presidential baby, to look forward to.” On Sunday, This Week avoided Keystone, yet the ABC program opened with an announcer hyping, “Chelsea Clinton’s surprise announcement. Has a Clinton dynasty begun?” Host Martha Raddatz brought the baby up to her panel and fawned, “Very important question, what do you think Hillary Clinton should be called as a grandma?”

***

ABC’s Nightline, which hasn’t mentioned a serious topic like ObamaCare in 159 days, devoted two minutes and 24 seconds to the Clinton baby on Thursday night.

NBC has mostly ignored Keystone. However, its subsidiary, CNBC, at least mentioned that Democratic billionaire Tom Steyer pledged $100 million to Democratic candidates on the condition that the pipeline not be approved.

Meanwhile, the major news networks (other than Fox and to a tiny extent CNN) also ignored the latest development in the IRS scandal:  the revelation that the former IRS chief contacted the Justice Department about criminal investigations of tax-exempt groups.

Katie Pavlich of Townhall, emails obtained by  Judicial Watch through a FOIA request, show  that former IRS official Lois Lerner “was in contact with the Department of Justice in May 2013 about whether tax exempt groups could be criminally prosecuted for “lying” about political activity.”

Newsbusters reported on the lack of interest in this bombshell story:

CNN only gave two news briefs — 43 seconds in total — to the story, however, ignoring it during all the other news hours.

None of the broadcast networks reported the news on Wednesday night or Thursday morning. Earlier this week, the networks ignored another big development in the scandal, the RNC suing the IRS for “illegal stonewalling” of their requests for documents related to the scandal.

The latest omissions are only the latest in a string of developments in the scandal missed by the networks.

Also, President Obama was not asked about the story at his Thursday afternoon press conference.

Over at the Campaign Spot, Jim Geraghty has a message for the MSM: Enough Puff Pieces About Chelsea Clinton Already.

He notes that Clinton is a minor celebrity “whose adult life consists mostly of stepping through doors opened by her parents’ power and meandering through the highest levels of high society without actually doing much.”

Dear friends on the Left: You can’t bemoan the death of opportunity in America, and rail against the richest one percent, and then devour puff pieces on how exceptionally talented and wonderful the offspring of our super-wealthy political leaders are, earning plaudits just by showing up with their famous last names. Paul Krugman declared that Horatio Alger was dead back in 2003. The self-made success story may not be dead, but she’s impeded by every powerful institution that sets up sweet, high-paying, low-responsibility gigs for the special children of the gilded class.

What’s really astounding is how our friends on the Left can turn their elite-status-and-wealth-resentment on and off as if it was attached to a light switch. You may recall Jim Hightower at the 1988 Democratic National Convention, sneering that George H.W. Bush was “born on third base [who] thought he had hit a triple.” (The quote is frequently attributed to Ann Richards.) Yeah, that 55-combat-mission naval aviator who got shot down over the Pacific and who lost his four-year-old daughter to leukemia sure lived a life of ease and comfort.

Because of this insidious double standard, the nation is stuck with a president and attorney general whose serial scandals and corruptions would have led to them being impeached already if they had an R after their names. Her role in the Benghazi scandal should preclude Hillary Clinton from even thinking about running for president. But then – she knows the MSM has her back.

As we are forced to deal with such blatant bias on a daily basis,  couldn’t they at least spare us these nauseating puff pieces on our Democrat “royalty?”

 

 

 

 

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,587,218 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 507 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: